Select works of Porphyry; containing his four books On abstinence from animal food; his treatise On the Homeric cave of the nymphs; and his Auxiliaries to the perception of intelligible natures

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world’s books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book’s long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google’s system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
ai[http: //books . google. com/|

SELECT WORKS

OF

PORPHYRY;

CONTAINING
HIS FOUR BOOKS ON
ABSTINENCE FROM ANIMAL FOOD;
HIS TREATISE ON

THE HOMERIC CAVE OF THE NYMPHS;

AND HIS ’

AUXILIARIES

TO THE

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES.

TRANSLATED FROM THE GREEK

BY

THOMAS TAYLOR.
——i

WITH .

AN APPENDIX,
EXPLAINING THE ALLEGORY OF THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.
BY THE TRANSLATOR.

—— oe

Kas ovre Sav καὶ αὐϑρωπων ϑείων καὶ εὐδαιμογων βιος, awadrdayn τῶν αλλων
τῶν rude, ἀγηδονος τῶν τηδὲ, φυγη peovou προς pcovev.—PLoTIN: Op. p. 771.

LONDON:

PRINTED FOR

THOMAS RODD, 17, GREAT NEWPORT STREET.
1823.

883
P7152

+Tos

LONDON :
PRINTED BY J. MOYES, GREVILLE STREET.

ΤΟ

THE REV. WILLIAM JOHN JOLLIFFE,

AS A TESTIMOMY OF GREAT ESTEEM FOR HIS
TALENTS AND WORTH,

AND A TRIBUTE OF THE WARMEST GRATITUDE FOR
HIS PATRONAGE,

‘THIS WORK IS DEDICATED

BY THE TRANSLATOR,

THOMAS TAYLOR.

INTRODUCTION.

Porpryry, the celebrated author of the treatises
translated in this volume, was dignified by his
contemporaries, and by succeeding Platonists,
with the appellation of the philosopher, on account
of his very extraordinary philosophical attain-
ments. He is likewise called by Simplicius, the
most learned of the philosophers, and is praised by |
Proclus for his ssgorgern νοηματὰ, or conceptions
adapted to sanctity; the truth of all which appel-
lations is by the following treatises most abun-
dantly and manifestly confirmed.

A few biographical particulars only have been
transmitted to us respecting this great man, and
these are as follow. He was born at Tyre, in the
twelfth year of the reign of the Emperor Alex-
ander Severus, and in the two hundred and
thirty-third of the Christian era; and he died
at Rome, when he was more than seventy years
old, in the latter part of the Emperor Dioclesian’s
reign. He was also a disciple first of Longinus,
and afterwards of the great Plotinus, with whom
he became acquainted in the thirtieth year of his

b

vi INTRODUCTION.

age; and it is to Porphyry we are indebted for
the publication of the inestimable and uncom-
monly profound works of that most extraordinary
man. For, as I have observed in my History
of the Restoration of the Platonic Theology, it
was a long time before Plotinus committed his
thoughts to writing, and gave the world a copy
of his inimitable mind. That light which was
destined to illuminate the philosophical world,
as yet shone with solitary splendour, or beamed
only on a beloved few; and it was through Por-
phyry alone that it at length emerged from its
sanctuary, and displayed its radiance in full per-
fection, and with unbounded diffusion. For Por-
phyry, in the language of Eunapius, “ like a
Mercurial chain let. down for the benefit of
mortals, unfolded every thing with accuracy and
clearness, by the assistance of universal eru-
dition.”

We are likewise informed, by the same Eu-
napius, that Porphyry, when he first associated
with Plotinus, bade farewell to all his other
preceptors, and totally applied himself to the
friendship of that wonderful man. Here he filled
his mind with science, as from a perennial and
never-satiating fount. But afterwards, being con-
quered, as it were, by the magnitude of his doc-
trines, he conceived a hatred of body, and could
no longer endure the fetters of mortality. —

INTRODUCTION. Vil

‘‘ Hence,” says he*, “1 formed au intention’ of Ὁ
_ destroying myself, which Plotinus wonderfully
perceived; and as I was walking home, stood
before me, and said, Your present design, O
Porphyry, is not the dictate of a sound intellect, but
rather of a soul raging with an atrabilarious fury.
In consequence of this he ordered me to depart
from Rome; and accordingly I went to Sicily,
having heard that a certain worthy and elegant
man dwelt at that time about Lilybeum. And
thus, indeed, I was liberated from this perturba-
tion of soul; but was, in the meantime, hindered
from being with Plotinus till his death.”
Porphyry also maintains a very distinguished
rank among those great geniuses who contributed
to the development of the genuine dogmas of
Plato, after they had been lost for upwards of
five hundred years ; as I have shown in my above-
mentioned History of the Restoration of the Pla-
tonic Theology. Among these dogmas, that which
is transcendently important is this,— that the inef-
fable principle of things, which is denominated
by Plato the good and the one, is something supe-
rior to intellect and being itself. This, as we are
informed by Proclus, was demonstrated by Por-
phyry, by many powerful and . beautiful argu-
ments, in his treatise Concernmg Principles,

2 In Vit. Plotin.

Vili INTRODUCTION.

which is unfortunately lost. And this dognia}’
which was derived principally from the 6th. book
of the Republic, and the Parmenides, of Plato,
and was adopted by all succeeding Platonists, is
copiously unfolded, and the truth of it supported
by reasoning replete with what Plato calls geo-
metrical necessities, by those two great philo-
sophical luminaries Proclus and Damascius’; the
former of whom was the Corypheus of the Plato-
nists, and the latter possessed a profoundly in-
vestigatmg mind.

Of the disciples of Porphyry the most cele-
brated was Iamblichus, a man of an uncommonly
penetrating genius, and who, like his master
Plato, on account of the sublimity of his con-
ceptions, and his admirable proficiency in theo-
Jogical learning, was surnamed the divine. This
extraordinary man, though zealously attached to
the Platonic philosophy, yet explored the wisdom
of other sects, particularly of the Pythagoreans, ᾿
Egyptians, and Chaldeans; and formed one beau-
tiful system of recondite knowledge, from their
harmonious conjunction‘.

» See the 2d book of my translation of Proclus on the
Theology of Plato, and the Introduction to my translation of
Plato, and notes on the 3d volume of that translation.

e See my translation of his Life of Pythagoras, and also of
his treatise on the Mysteries. The Emperor Julian says of
Iamblichus, ‘ that he was posterior in time, but not in genius,
_ to Plato himself.”

INTRODUCTION. ix:

With respect to the works of Porphyry which
are translated in this volume, the first, which’
is On Abstinence from Amimal Food, is a treatise
not only replete with great erudition, but 15
remarkable for the purity of life which it ‘incul-
cates, and the sanctity of conception with which
it abounds. At the same time it must be remem-
bered, that it was written solely, as Porphyry
himself informs us, with a view to the man who
wishes in the present life to liberate himself as
much as possible from the fetters of the corporeal
nature, in order that he may elevate his intel-
lectual eye to the contemplation of truly-evisting
being (το ovrws ov,) and may establish himself in
deity as in his paterv’hl port*. But such a one, as

4 Such a man as this, is arranged by Plotinus in the class
of divine men, in the following extract from my translation of his
treatise on Intellect, Ideas, and Real Being, Ennead V. 9.
The extract, which is uncommonly beautiful in the original,
forms the beginning of the treatise. ‘ Since all men, from their
birth, employ sense prior to intellect, and are necessarily first
' conversant with sensibles, some, proceeding no farther, pass
through life, considering these as the first and last of things,
and apprehending, that whatever is painful among these, is evil,
and whatever is pleasant, is good; thus, thinking it sufficient to
pursue the one and avoid the other. Those, too, among them,
who pretend to a greater share of reason than others, esteem
this to be wisdom; being affected in a manner similar to more
heavy birds, who, collecting many things from the earth, and
being oppressed with the weight, are unable to fly on high,

Χ INTRODUCTION.

he beautifully observes, must divest himself of
every thing of a mortal nature which he has
assumed, must withdraw himself from sense and
imagination, and the irrationality with which
they are attended, and from an adhering affec-
tion and passion towards them ; and must enter
the stadium naked and unclothed, striving for the
most glorious of all prizes, the Olympia of the
5001". Hence, says he, ‘‘ my discourse is not
directed to those who are occupied in sordid
mechanical arts, nor to those who are engaged in
athletic exercises; neither to soldiers nor sailors,
nor rhetoricians, nor to those who lead an active

though they have received wings fdr this purpose from nature.
But others are in a small degree elevated from things subor-
dinate, the more excellent part of the soul recalling them from
pleasure to a more worthy pursujt. As they are, however,
unable to look on high, and as not possessing any thing else
which can afford them rest, they betake themselves, together
with the name of virtue, to actions and the election of things
inferior, from which they at first endeavoured to raise themselves,
' though in vain. In the third class is the race of divine men, who
through a more excellent power, and with piercing eyes, acutely
perceive supernal light, to the vision of which they raise them-
selves, above the clouds and darkness, as it were, of this lower
world, and there abiding, despise every thing in these regions of
sense ; being no otherwise delighted with the place which is
truly and properly their own, than he who, after many wander-
ings, is at length restored to his lawful country.”
* Page 23.

INTRODUCTION. xi

life’; but I write to the man who considers what
he is, whence he came, and whither he ought
to tend, and who, in what pertains to nutriment
and other necessary concerns, 15 different from
those who propose to themselves other kinds
of life; for to none but such as these do I direct my
discourse®.” This treatise, also, is highly valuable
for the historical information which it contains,
independently of the philosophical beauties with
which it abounds. |

The Explanation of the Homeric Cave of the
Nymphs, which follows next, is not only remark-
able for the great erudition which it displays, but
also for containing some profound arcana of
the mythology and symbolical theology of the
Greeks.

And the third treatise, which is denominated

* The translator of this work, and of the other treatises con-
tained in this volume, having been so circumstanced, that he
has been obliged to mingle the active with the contemplative
life (μετα θεορητικου vou πολιτευόμενος) in acquiring for himself
a knowledge of the philosophy of Plato, and disseminating that
philosophy for the good of others, has also found it expedient to
make use of a fleshy diet. Nothing, however, but an imperious
necessity, from causes which it would be superfluous to detail
at present, could have induced him to adopt animal, instead of
vegetable nutriment. But though he has been nurtured in
Eleatic and Academic studies, yet it has not been in Academic
bowers.

§ Page 19.

ΧΙ] INTRODUCTION.

Auziliaries ἐφ the Perception of Inteliigibles, may be
considered as an excellent introduction to the
works of Plotinus in general, from which a great
part of it is extracted, and in particular, to the
following books of that most sublime genius, viz.
On the Virtues"; On the Impassivity of Incar-
poreal Natures’; and ‘On Truly-Existing Being,
in which it is demonstrated that such being js
every where one and the same whole*. This
Porphyrian treatise, also, is admirably calculated
to afford assistance to the student of the Theolo-
gical Elements of Proclus, a work never to be suffi-
ciently praised for the scientific accuracy, pro-
fundity of conception, and luminous development
of the most important dogmas, which it display.

In the fourth place, Porphyry, in his treatise
On the Cave of the Nymphs, having informed us,
that Numenius, the Pythagorean, considered the
person of Ulysses, in the Odyssey, as the image
of a man who passes in a regular manner over the
stormy sea of generation, or a sensible life, and
thus at length arrives at a region where tempest
and seas are unknown, and finds a nation

“Who ne’er new salt, or heard the billows roar :”

I have endeavoured, by the assistance of this

bh Ennead I. 2. 1 Ennead III. 6.
* Ennead VI. lib. 4, δ.

INTRODUSTFON. xiii

intimation, to unfold,.in the Appendix: which
concludes the work, the secret: meaning of the
allegory; and, I trust, in a way which will not be
. deemed by the intelligent reader either visionary
oer vain.

With respectto the translation of the treatises,
I have endeavoured faithfully to preserve both
the matter and manner of the author; and have
availed myself of the best editions of them, and,
likewise, of all the information which appeared to
me to be most important, and most appropriate,
from the remarks of critics and philologists, but
especially from the elucidations of philosophers.
This, I trust, will be evident from a perusal of the
notes which aceompany the translation.

Of all the other writings of Porphyry, besides
those translated in this volume, few unfortunately
have been preserved entire’, the greater part of
what remains of them being fragments. Among
these fragments, however, there is one very
important, lately found by Angelus Maius, and ~
published by him, Mediol. 1816, 8ve.. It is
nearly the whole of the Epistle of Porphyry to his
wife Marcella, in which I have discovered the

' For even with respect to the treatise On Abstinence from
Animal Food, there is every reason to believe that something is
wanting at the end of it.

ΧΙΝ INTRODUCTION.

original of many of the Sentences of the cele-
brated Sextus Pythagoricus”, which have been

m See the Latin translation of these Sentences by Ruffinus,
in the Opuscula Mythologica of Gale. The Sentences which
are to be found in this Epistle of Porphyry, were published by
me, with some animadversions, in the Classical Journal, about
two years ago; but on account of the great importante of these
Sentences, and for the sake of those who may not have this
Journal in their possession, I shall here repeat what I have there
said on this subject.

After having premised that great praise is due to the editor
for the publication of this Epistle, but that, as he has taken no
notice of the sources whence most of the beautiful moral sen-
tences with which this Epistle abounds, are derived, it becomes
necessary to unfold them to the reader, particularly as by this
means several of the Sentences of Sextus Pythagoricus may be
obtained in the original Greek ; — I then observe :

‘‘ Previous, however, to this development, I shall present
the reader with the emendation of the following defective sen-
tence in p. 19: To δὲ πεπαιδευσθαι οὐκ εν «ολυμαθειας ἀναληψεῖι
880 παλαξει δὲ των Ψυχικὼων wader εθεωρειτος. The editor, not
being an adept in the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, con-
ceived that παλαξει was a genuine word; for he remarks, ‘* Nota
vocabulum wraAaéic,” whereas it is only a part of a word, i.e. it
is a part of απαλλαξει. Hence, if after αναληψει, the words ἐν
απαλλάξει are-inserted, the sentence of Porphyry will be perfect
both in its construction and meaning, and will be in English,
“ Erudition does not consist in the resumption of polymathy,
but is to be surveyed in a liberation from the passions pertaining
to the soul.” The editor, not perceiving the necessity of this
emendation, has, by the following version, totally mistaken the
meaning of the sentence: ‘* Bonam autem institutionem nun-

INTRODUCTION. => XV

hitherto supposed to be alone extant in the
fraudulent Latin version of the Presbyter Ruf-

quam estimem, quee cum eruditionis copia, animalium quoque
passionum contaminatione sordescat.”

The first sentence of which I have discovered the source, is
from Sextus, and is the following, in p. 23: θεὸς μεν γαρ δειται
ουδενος" coos δὲ μονοῦυ θεου: 2.6. ““ For God is not in want of any
thing; but the wise man is alone in want of God.” This, in
the version of Ruffinus, is: “ Deus quidem nullius eget, fidelis
autem Dei solius.” (Vid. Opusc. Mytholog. 8vo. 1688, p. 646.)

2: Tlaons πραξεως καὶ WITS ἐργοῦυ καὶ λογου θεος ἐποπτης “-ἀρεστὼ
καὶ εῷορος, (p. 24): ἢ, ε. “ Of every action, and of every deed
and word, God is present as the scrutator and inspector.” This

is evidently derived from the following sentence of Demophilus, .

(Opusc. Mythol. p. 621): Ἐὰν aes μνημονευης, ors ὁποῦ ἂν ἢ ἡ Ψψυχη
σου, καὶ TO THe epyor ἀπόοτελει, θεος ἐφεστηκχεν εῴορος, ay πάσαις σου
dass εὐχαῖς καὶ πράξεσιν, αιδεσθησὴ μὲν τοῦ θεωρου τὸ ἀληστον, εξεις δὲ
τὸν θεὸν σύναικον, ὃ. 6. “ If you always remember, that wherever
your soul, or your body, performs any deed, God is present as
an inspector, in all your prayers and actions, you will reverence
the nature of an inspector, from whom nothing can be con-
cealed, and will have God for a cohabitant.” What imme-
diately follows in this paragraph is from Sextus, viz. xa: πάντων
ὧν πράττομεν ἀγαθὼν tov θεὸν aitiov ἡγωμεθα : 2.e. ““ OF all the
‘good that we do, we should consider God as the cause.” And
Sextus says, p. 648. “ Deus in bonis actibus hominibus dux
est.” Porphyry adds: Twy δὲ χακὼν curios ἡμεῖς ἐσμεν οι EAOMEVOS,
bcos δὲ ἀναίτιος. And the latter part is evidently from Sextus,
who says, Ὁ. 648, ‘‘ Mali nullius autor est Deus.” Porphyry
further adds: Odev καὶ εὐκταῖον ta ἀξια θεου" και αἰτωμεθα ἃ μη
λαθδοιμεν ἂν παρ᾽ ετερου" καὶ WY ἡγεμόνες οἱ μετ᾽ ἄρετὴς TOVOL, ταυτὰ
εὐχόμεθα γενεσθαι μετα τοὺς πονοὺς : ὃ. 6. “ Hence we should ask
of God things which are worthy of him, and which we cannot

ΧΥ INTRODUCTION.

fnus. And for an account of the other entire
works and fragments that are extant, and also

receive from any other. The goods also, of which labours are
the leaders, in conjunction with virtue, we should pray that we
may obtain after the labours [are accomplished].” ΑἹ] this is
from Sextus. For, in p. 648, he says: “ Hee posce ἃ Deo,
quee dignum est preestare Deum. Ea pete 4 Deo, que accipere
ab homine non potes. In quibus preecedere debet labor, heec
tibi opta evenire post laborem.” Only, in this last sentence,
Ruffinus has omitted to add, after labor, the words cum virtute.
What Porphyry says, almost immediately after this, is precisely
the first of the Sentences of Demophilus, (Opuse. Mythol.
p. 626), viz. “A de κτησάμενος ov καθεξεις, un αἰτου παρα θεου" δῶρον
yap feou παν αναφαιρετον' wore ov duces ὃ μη καθεξεις: 1. ε. “ Do
not ask of God that which, when you have obtained, you can-
not preserve. For every gift of God is incapable of being taken
away; so that he will not give that which you cannot retain.”
The sentence immediately following this is ascribed to Pytha-
goras, and is to be found in the Sentences of Stobeeus, (edit.
1609, p. 65): viz. Ὧν de του σώματος απαλλάγεισα ov δεηθησῃ,
ἐκείνων καταφρόνει" καὶ ὧν ἂν «παλλαγεισιι den, εἰς Tare av
ασκουμενὴ Tov θεον παρεκάλει γενεσθαι συλλήπτορα. In Stobeug,
however, there is some difference, so as to render the sentence
more complete. For immediately after καταῴρονει, there is παν-
τῶν; for dendnon there is denon; for den, denon; for τὸν θερν, Tous
beous; for cu ἀσκουμενη, σοι ἀσκουμεένῳ ; and instead of yevecbas
συλληπτορα, yeverbas σοι συλλήπτορα. ‘This, therefore, translated,
will be: ““ Despise .all those things which, when liberated from
the body, you will not want; and exercising yourself in those
things, of which, when liberated from the body, you will be |
in want, invoke the Gods to become your helpers.” In pp, 27
and 28, Porphyry says, αἱρετώτερον σοι οντος [xpnuata] ein

_ INTRODUCDYON. ΧΥΙ͂Σ

of the lost writings of Porphyry, I. τοίου the:
réadet to the Bibliotheca Greeca of. Fabricius, and:

Baas ἢ Acyov: και το ἡττασθρι τ᾽ ἀληθὴ λεγοντα, ἣ νικῶν “πατωντα :
ἐ, 6. “ It should be more eligible to you carelessly to throw
away riches than reason; and to be vanquished when speaking
the truth, than to vanquish by deception.” And the latter part
of this sentence is to be found in Sextus: for in p. 649 he says,
“ Melius est vinci vera dicentem, quam vincere, mentientem.
Almost immediately after Porphyry adds, Αδυνατον τὸν avrov
Φιλοθεον τε εἰναι καὶ Φιληδονον καὶ Φιλοσωμᾶτον' o γαρ Φιληδόνος
καὶ Φιλοσωμάᾶτος. πάντως καὶ Φιλοχρηματος' o δὲ φιλοχρήματος, εξ
ἀγαγκὴς αδικος" 0 δὲ adixos, καὶ εἰς θεὸν καὶ εἰς πατερῶς ἀνοσίος, καὶ.
εἰς τοὺς αλλοὺς παράνομος wore καν εκατομβας θνη, καὶ μυριοις
ἀναθημασι γεως ἀγαλλῃ, «ἀσεβὴς ἐστι καὶ ἀθεος xdu τῇ προαιρεσει
ἐεβοσυλος Olo και σαντα φιλοσωμοίτον ὡς abeov καὶ μμᾶρον extoemecbat
xen. This sentence is the last of the Sentences of Demophilus,
(Opusc.. Mythol. p.. 625); but in Porphyry it is in one part
defective, and in another is fuller thanin Demophilus. For in
the first colon, φιλοχρήματον is wanting: in the second colon,
after o yap Piandovos καὶ φιλοσωματος, the words ὁ δὲ Φιλοσωμᾶτος
ate: wanting. And in Demophilus, instead of ο δὲ adixos. καὶ
eis θεον και εἰς WATERS AVOTIOS, και εἰς τοὺς ἀλλοὺς παράνομος, there
is‘ nothing more than ὁ δὲ adixos, εἰς μεν θεὸν ἀνόσιος, εἰς δὲ ανϑρωπους
σαρανομος. In Demophilus also, after wore xay ἑκατόμβας bun

the words xa: μυριοις ἀναθημασι τοὺφ vews ἀγαλληῃ, are wanting.
And in Porphyry, after yews ayaaan, the words πολυ μάλλον
avorimTepos ἐστι, καὶ, are wanting. This sentence therefore, thus
amended, will be in English, “ It is impossible for the same
person to be a lover of God, a lover of pleasure, a lover of body,
and a lover of riches. For a lover of pleasure is also a lover of
body; but a lover of body is entirely a lover of riches; and a

XVIll INTRODUCTION.

to my before-mentioned History of the Restora-
tion of the Platonic Theology ; in which latter

lover of riches is necessarily unjust. But he who is unjust
is impious towards God and his parents, and lawless towards
others. So that, though he should sacrifice hecatombs, and
adorn temples with ten thousand gifts, he will be much more
unholy, impious, atheistical, and sacrilegious in his deliberate
choice. Hence it is necessary to avoid every lover of body, as
one who is without God, and is defiled.”

3: The following passages in the epistle of Porphyry, are
from Sextus: O δὲ ἀξιος ανθρωπος θεου, Osos ἂν ein, (p. 30,) 3. 6.
‘ The man who is worthy of God, will be himself a God.” And
Sextus says, ‘¢ Dignus Deo homo, deus est et in hominibus.”
(p. 654.) Porphyry SAYS, Kas τιμήσεις μὲν ἄριστα Toy θεον, οτᾶν τῷ
θεω τὴν cautns διανοιαν ομοιῶσεις, (p. 30,) ὁ. 6, “ And you will
honour God in the best manner, when you assimilate your
reasoning power to God.” Thus also Sextus, ‘‘ Optime honorat
Deum 1116, qui mentem suam, quantum fieri potest, similem Deo
facit,” (p. 655.) Again, Porphyry says, Θεὸς δὲ ανθρωπον βεβαιοι
πρασσοντα καλα" κακῶν δὲ weatswy κακὸς δαιμὼν ἡγεμὼν, (p. 31): te.
“ God corroborates man when he performs beautiful deeds; but
an evil deemon is the leader of bad actions.” And Sextus says,
“ Deus bonos actus hominum confirmat. Malorum actuum,
malus deemon dux est.” (p. 653). Porphyry adds, Ῥυχη δὲ σοῷου
αρμοξεται % 005 θεον, aes θεον Ope, 'συνεστιν aes θεῳ, (p. 31,) a. e. “ The
soul of the wise man is adapted to God; it always beholds
God, and is always present with God.” Thus, too, Sextus,
‘‘ Sapientis anima audit Deum, sapientis anima aptatur a Deo,
sapientis anima semper est cum Deo, (p. 655). There is, how-
ever, some difference between the original and the Latin version,
which is most probably owing to the fraud of Ruffinus, And in

INTRODUCTION. xIX

‘work, in: speaking of Porphyry-s lost ‘treatise
on the Reascent of the Soul, I have given a

the last place, Porphyry says, AAA xengis ευσεδειας σοι νομιξισθω
ἡ φιλανθρωπια, (p. ὅ8,) 1. 6. ““ Philanthropy should be considered
by you as the foundation of piety.” And Sextus says, “ Fun- ᾿
damentum et initium est cultis Dei, amare Dei homines.”
(p. 664). Ruffinus, however, in this version, fraudulently trans-
lates Q:Aavbgatria, amare Det homines, in order that this sentence,
as well as the others, might appear to be written by Sixtus the
bishop! |

4. The learned reader will find the following passages in
the Epistle of Porphyry, to be sentences of Demophilus, viz.
Aoyov yap θεου τοις ὑπὸ δοξης διεφθαρμενοις λέγειν, κιτ.λ. usque ad
scov Φερει, (p. 29). Οὐχ n yawrra tou copou τιμιον παρα θεω, x.7.A.
usque ad μονος εἰδὼς ευξασθαι, (p. 32). Ou xorwbevres ουν οἱ Geos
βλαπτουσι, x.T.A. usque ad bem δὲ οὐδὲν aBouantoy, (p. 35). Ours
δακρυα καὶ ixeteias θεὸν επιστρεφουσι, ουτε θυηπολια θεὸν τιμωσιν,
ουτε ἀναθημάτων πληθος κοσμουσι θεὸν, κιτ.λ. usque ad ἐεροσυλοις
xopnyia, (p. 36). In which passage, however, there is ἃ remark-
able difference, as the learned reader will find, between the text
of Porphyry and that of Demophilus. Eazy οὖν ass μνημονευης,
οτι οπου avn uxn cou περιπατῃ, xa To σωμᾶ evepyov (lege Epyov,)
QMOTEAN, X.T.A. uSque ad τὸν θεὸν σύνοικον, (p. 37). Ο συνετὸς
cmp καὶ Geopirns, x.T.A. usque ad σπουδαξεται πονησας, (p. 54).
Γυμνος δὲ ἀποσταάλεις [copes] x.7.a. usque ad eanxoos ὁ θεος,
(p. 54.) Χαλεπωτερον dovasvew πάθεσιν ἢ τυράννοις. And ora yap
ain ψυχης, τοσουτοῖ καὶ wuor δεσποται, (p. 57). And lastly,
πολλῳ Yap κρείττον τεῦναναι ἢ δὶ axpaciay τὴν ψυχὴν ἀμαύυρωσαι,
(p. 58). In all these passages, it will be found, by comparing
them with Porphyry, that they occasionally differ from the text
of Demophilus, yet not so as to alter the sense.

xx INTRODUCTION.

. jong.and most interesting extract relative to that
* treatise, from Synesias on Dreams:

_ Lonly add, that many of the Sentences of Demophilus will
be found among those of Sextus. Nor is this at all wonderful,
as it was usual with the Pythagoreans, from their exalted notions
of friendship, to consider the work of one of them as the pro-
duction of all.

THE

SELECT WORKS OF PORPHYRY.

eo
ON

ABSTINENCE FROM ANIMAL FOOD.

BOOK THE FIRST.

I. Hearine from some of our acquaintance, O Firmus*,
that you, having rejected a fleshless diet, have again
returned to animal food, at first I did not credit the
report, when I considered your temperance, and the
reverence which you have been taught to pay to those
ancient and pious men from whom we have received the
precepts of philosophy. But when others who came
after these confirmed this report, it appeared to me that
it would be too rustic and remote from the rational
method of persuasion to reprehend you, who neither,
according to the proverb, flying from evil have found
something better, nor according to Empedocles, having
lamented your former life, have converted yourself to one
that is more excellent. I have therefore thought it
worthy of the friendship which subsists between us, and
also adapted to those who have arranged their life con-

* Porphyry elsewhere calls this Firmus Castricius his friend and
fellow disciple. See more concerning him in Porphyry’s Life of
Plotinus.

B

2 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

formably to truth, to disclose your errors through a con-
futation derived from an argumentative discussion.

2. For when I considered with myself what could be >
the cause of this alteration in your diet, I could by
no means suppose that it was for the sake of health and
strength, as the vulgar and idiots would say; since, on
the contrary, you yourself, when you were with us, con-
fessed that a fleshless diet contributed both to health and
to the proper endurance of philosophic labours; and
experience testifies, that in saying this you spoke the
truth. It appears, therefore, that you have returned to
your former illegitimate” conduct, either through decep-
tion’, because you think it makes no difference with
respect to the acquisition of wisdom whether you use this
or that diet; or perhaps through some other cause of
which 1 am ignorant, which excited in you a greater fear
than that which could be produced by the impiety of
transgression. For I should not say that you have
despised the philosophic laws which we derived from our
ancestors, and which you have so much admired, through
intemperance, or for the sake of voracious gluttony; or
that you are naturally inferior to some ofthe vulgar, who,
when they have assented to laws, though contrary to
those under which they formerly lived, will suffer ampu-
tation [rather than violate them], and will abstain from
certain animals on which they before fed, more than they
‘would from human flesh.

3. But when I was also informed by certain persons
that you even employed arguments against those who
abstained from animal food, I not only pitied, but was

b gagavoysnuara, Porphyry calls the conduct of Firmus illegitimate,
because the feeding on flesh is for the most part contrary to the laws of
"genuine philosophy.

¢ The original in this place is, 4% ἀπάτην ov, ἢ τὸ μηδὲν διαφέρειν ἡγείσθαι
προς φρόνησιν, X.7.A. ; but, for ἢ τὸ μηδὲν διαφέρειν, 1 read δια τὸ μηδὲν διαφέρειν.
And this appears to have been the reading which Felicianus found in his
MS.; for his version of this passage is, “ Vel 1 igitur deceptione inductus,
quod sive hoe sive illo modo vescaris, &c.”

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. | 3

indignant with you, that, being persuaded by certain
frigid and very corrupt sophisms, you have deceived
yourself, and have endeavoured to subvert a dogma which is
both ancient and dear to the Gods. Hence it appeared to
me to be requisite not only to show you what our own ἢ
opinion is on this subject, but also to collect and dissolve
the arguments of our opponents, which are much stronger
than those adduced by you in multitude and power, and
every other apparatus; and thus to demonstrate, that
truth is not vanquished even by those arguments which
seem to be weighty, and much less by superficial
sophisms. For you are perhaps ignorant, that not a few
philosophers are adverse to abstinence from animal food,
but that this is the case with those of the Peripatetic and
Stoic sects, and with most of the Epicureans; the last
of whom have written in opposition to the philosophy of
Pythagoras and Empedocles, of which you once were
studiously emulous. To this abstinence, likewise, many
philologists are adverse, among whom Clodius the Nea-
politan wrote a treatise against those who abstain from
flesh. Of these men I shall adduce the disquisitions and
common arguments against this dogma, at the same time
omitting those reasons which are peculiarly employed by
them against the demonstrations of Empedocles.

The Arguments of the. Peripatetics and Stotcs, from
Heraclides Ponticus*. |

4, Our opponents therefore say, in the first place,
that justice will be confounded, and things immoveable
be moved, if we extend what is just, not only to the
rational, but also to the irrational nature ; conceiving that
not only Gods and men pertain to us, but that there
is likewise an alliance between us and brutes, who fin
reality] have no conjunction with us. Nor shall we
employ some of them in laborious works, and use others
for food, from a conviction that the association which is . -

4 This philosopher was an auditor of Plato and Speusippus.

4 ΟΝ ABSTINENCE FROM

between us and them, in the same manner as that of
some foreign polity, pertains to a tribe different from
ours, and is dishonourable. For he who uses these as if
they were men, sparing and not injuring them, thus
endeavouring to adapt to justice that which it cannot
bear, both destroys its power, and corrupts that which is
appropriate, by the introduction of what is foreign. For
it necessarily follows, either that we act unjustly by
sparing them, or if we spare and do not employ them,
that it will be impossible for us to live. We shall also,
after a manner, live the life of brutes, if we reject the.use
which they are capable of affording.

5. For I shall omit to mention the innumerable multi-
tude of Nomades and Troglodyte, who know of no other
nutriment than that of flesh; but to us who appear to
live mildly and philanthropically, what work would be
left for us on the earth or in the sea, what illustrious art,
what ornament of our food would remain, if we conducted
ourselves innoxiously and reverentially towards brutes,
as if they were of a kindred nature with us? For it
would be impossible to assign any work, any medicine,
or any remedy for the want which is destructive of
life, or that we can act justly, unless we preserve the
ancient boundary and law.

To fishes, savage beasts, and birds, devoid
Of justice, Jove to devour each other
Granted ; but justice to mankind he gave ©.

ὃ. 6. towards each other.

6. But it is not possible for us to act unjustly towards
those to whom we are not obliged to act justly. Hence,
for those who reject this reasoning, no other road of
justice is left, either broad or narrow, into which they can
enter. For, as we have already observed, our nature, not
being. sufficient to itself, but indigent of many things,
would be entirely destroyed, and enclosed in a life
involved in difficulties, unorganic, and deprived of neces-

¢ Hesiod. Op. et Di. lib. I. v. 275, &c.

ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK I. 5

saries,. if excluded from the assistance derived from
animals. It is likewise said, that those first men did not
live prosperously ; for this superstition did not stop
at animals, but compelled its votaries even to spare
plants. For, indeed, what greater injury does he do, who
cuts the throat of an ox or a sheep, than he who cuts
down a fir tree or an oak? since, from the doctrine of:
transmigration, a soul is also implanted in these. These
therefore are the principal arguments of the Stoics and
_. Peripatetics.

The Arguments of the Epicureans, from Hermachus'.

7. Tue Epicureans, however, narrating, as it were,
along genealogy, say, that the ancient legislators, look-
ing to the association of life, and the mutual actions
of men, proclaimed that manslaughter was unholy, and
punished it with no casual disgrace. Perhaps, indeed,
a certain natural alliance which exists in men towards
each other, through the similitude of form and soul,
is the reason why they do not so readily destroy an
animal of this kind, as some of the other animals which
are conceded to our use. Nevertheless, the greatest
cause why manslaughter was considered as a thing
grievous to be borne, and impious, was the opinion that
it did not contribute to the whole nature and condition of
human life. For, from a principle of this kind, those who
are capable of perceiving the advantage arising from this
decree, require no other cause of being restrained from a
deed so dire. But those who are not able to have a
sufficient perception of this, being terrified by the magni-
tude of the punishment, will abstain from readily destroy-
ing each other. For those, indeed, who survey the
utility of the before-mentioned ordinance, will promptly
observe it; but those who are not able to perceive the
benefit with which it is attended, will obey the mandate,

f This philosopher was a Mitylenzan, and is said to have been an
auditor of, and also the successor of, Epicurus.

6 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

in consequence of fearing the threatenings of the laws ;
which threatenings certain persons ordained for the sake of
those who could not, by a reasoning process, infer the
beneficial tendency of the decree, at the same time that
most would admit this to be evident.

8. For none of those legal institutes which were
established from the first, whether written or unwritten,
and which still remain, and are adapted to be transmitted,
[from one generation to another] became lawful through
violence, but through the consent of those that used
them. For those who introduced things of this kind to
the multitude, excelled in wisdom, and not in strength of
body, and the power which subjugates the rabble. Hence,
through this, some were led to a rational consideration
of utility, of which before they had only an irrational
sensation, and which they had frequently forgotten; but
others were terrified by the magnitude of the punish-
ments. For it was not possible to use any other remedy
for the ignorance of what, is beneficial, than the dread of
the punishment ordained by law. For this alone even
now keeps the vulgar in awe, and prevents them from
doing any thing, either publicly or privately, which is not
beneficial [to the community]. But if all men were
similarly capable of surveying and recollecting what is
advantageous, there would be no need of laws, but men
would spontaneously avoid such things as are prohibited,
and perform ‘such as they were ordered to do. For
the survey of what is useful and detrimental, is a suffi-
cient incentive to the avoidance of the one and the
choice of the other. But the infliction of punishment
has a reference to those who do not foresee what is bene-
. ficial. For impendent punishment forcibly compels such
as these to subdue those impulses which lead them
to useless actions, and to do that which is right.

9. Hence also, legislators ordained, that even invo-
luntary manslaughter should not be entirely void of
punishment; in order that they might not only afford no
pretext for the voluntary imitation of those deeds which

ῳ

ANIMAL-FOOD.— BOOK 1, Ἴ

were involuntarily performed, but also that they might
prevent many things of this kind from taking place,
which happen, in réality, involuntarily. For neither.
is this advantageous through the same causes by which
men were forbidden voluntarily to destroy each other.
Since, therefore, of involuntary deeds, some proceed from
a cause which is unstable, and which cannot. be guarded
against by human nature; but others are’ produced by
our negligence and inattention to different circumstances;
hence legislators, wishing to restrain that indolence which
is injurious to our neighbours, did: not even leave aq
involuntary noxious deed without punishment, but,
through the fear of penalties, prevented the commission
of numerous offences of this kind. I also am of opinion,
that the slaughters which are allowed by law, and which
receive their accustomed expiations through certain puri-
fications, were introduced by these ancient. legislators,
who first very properly instituted these things for no
other reason than that they wished to prevent men
as much as possible from voluntary slaughter. For the
vulgar every where require something which may impede
them from promptly performing what is not advantageous
{to the community]. Hence those who first perceived
this to be the case, not only ordained the punishment
of fines, but also excited a certain other irrational dread,
through proclaiming those not to be pure who in any
way whatever had slain a man, unless theyeused purifica-
tions after the commission of the deed. For that part of
the soul which is void of intellect, being variously dis-
ciplined, acquired a becoming mildness, certain taming
arts having been from the first invented for the purpose
of subduing the irrational impulses of desire, by those
who governed the people. And one of the precepts pro-
mulgated on this occasion was, that men should not
destroy each other without discrimination.

10. Those, however, who first defined what we ought
to do, and what we ought not, very properly did not
forbid us to kill. other animals. For the advantage

8. ON ABSTINENCE FROM

arising from these is effected by.a contrary practice,
since, it is not possible that men could be preserved,
unless- they endeavoured to defend those who are nur-
tured with themselves from the attacks of other animals.
At that time, therefore, some of those, of the most
elegant manners, recollecting that they abstained from
slaughter because it was useful to the public safety, they
also reminded the rest of the people in their mutual asso-
ciations of what was the consequence of this abstinence ;
in order that, by refraining from the slaughter of their
kindred, they might preserve that communion which
greatly contributes to the peculiar safety of each indi-
vidual. But it-was not only found to be useful for men
not to separate from each other, and not to do any thing
injurious to those who were collected together in the.
same place, for the purpose of repelling the. attacks
of animals of another species; but also for defence
against men whose design was to act nefariously. Toa
certain extent, therefore, they abstained from the slaughter
of men, for these reasons, viz. in order that there might
be a communion among them in things that are neces-
sary, and that a certain utility might be afforded in each
of the above-mentioned incommodities. In the course of
time, however, when the offspring of mankind, through
their intercourse with each other, became. more widely
extended, and animals of a different species were ex-
pelled, certam persons directed their attention in a
rational way to what was useful to men in their mutual
nutriment, and did not alone recal this to their memory in
an irrational manner.

11. Hence they endeavoured still more firmly to
restrain those who readily destroyed each other, and who,
through an oblivion of past transactions, prepared a more
imbecile defence. But in attempting to effect this, they
introduced those- legal institutes which still remain in
cities and nations ; the multitude spontaneously assenting
to them, in consequence of now perceiving, in a greater
degree, the advantage arising from an association with

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IJ. 9

each other. For the destruction of every thing noxious,
and. the .preservation of that. which. is subservient to
its..extermination, similarly contribute to a fearless life.
And hence it is reasonable to suppose, that one. of.the.
above-mentioned particulars was forbidden, but that the
other was not prohibited. Nor must it be said, that the .
law allows us to destroy some. animals which are not
corruptive of human nature, and which. are not in any
other way injurious to our life. For, as I. may say,
no animal among those. which the law permits. us to kill is
of this kind; since, if we suffered them to increase
excessively, they. would become injurious to.us. But
through the number. of them which is now. preserved,
certain advantages are imparted to human life. For
sheep and oxen, and every such like.animal, when. the.
number of them is moderate, are beneficial to our neces-
sary wants; but if they. become redundant in the extreme,
and far.exceed the number which is sufficient, they then.
become detrimental to our life; the latter by employing
their strength, in consequence of participating. of this
through an innate power of nature, and the former,
by consuming the nutriment which springs up from the.
earth for our benefit alone. Hence, through this cause,
the slaughter of animals of this kind is not prohibited, in
order that as. many of them as are sufficient for our
use, and which we may be. able easily to subdue, may. be
left. For it is not with horses, oxen, arfd sheep, and
with all tame animals, as it is with lions and wolves, and,
in short, with all such as are called savage animals, that,
whether the number of them is small or great, no
multitude of them can be assumed, which, if left, would
alleviate the necessity of our life. And on this account,
indeed, we utterly destroy some of them; but of. others,
we take away as many as are found to be more than com-
mensurate to our use.

12. On this account, from. the above-mentioned
causes, it is similarly requisite to think, that what per-
tains to. the eating of animals, was ordained by {8956 who.

10 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

from the first established the laws; and that the advan-
tageous and the disadvantageous were the causes why
some animals were permitted to be eaten and others not.
So that those who assert, that every thing beautiful and
just subsists conformably to the peculiar opinions of men
respecting those who established the laws, are full of
a certain most profound stupidity. For it is not possible
that this thing can take place in any other way than that
in which the other utilities of life subsist, such as those
that are salubrious, and an innumerable multitude of
others. Erroneous opinions, however, are entertained in
many particulars, both of a public and private nature.
For certain persons do not perceive those legal institutes,
which are similarly adapted to all men; but some, con-
ceiving them to rank among things of an indifferent
nature, omit them; while others, who are of a contrary
opinion, think that such things as are not universally pro-
fitable, are every where advantageous. Hence, through
this cause, they adhere to things which are unappro-
priate ; though in certain particulars they discover what is
advantageous to themselves, and what contributes to
general utility. And among these are to be enumerated
the eating of animals, and the legally ordained destruc-
tions which are instituted by most nations on account
of the peculiarity of the region. It is not necessary,
however, that these institutes should be preserved by us,
because we do not dwell in the same place as those did
by whom they were made. If, therefore, it was possible
to make a certain compact with other animals in the
same manner as with men, that we should not kill them,
nor they us, and that they should not be indiscriminately
destroyed by us, it would be well to extend justice as far
as to this; for this extent of it would be attended
with security. But since it 1s among things impossible,
that animals which are not recipients of reason should
participate with us of law, on this account, utility cannot
be in a greater degree procured by security from other
animals, than from inanimate natures. But we can alone

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. 1]

obtain security from the liberty which we now possess of
putting them to death. And such are the arguments of
the Epicureans. ΝΝ

The Arguments of Claudius the Neapolitan, who published
a Treatise against Abstinence from Animal Food.

13. Ir now remains, that we should adduce what
plebeians and the vulgar are accustomed to say on this
subject. For they say, that the ancients abstained from
animals, not through piety, but because they did not yet
know the use of fire; but that as soon as they became
acquainted with its utility, they then conceived it to
be most honourable and sacred. They likewise called it
Vesta, and from this the appellation of convestals or com-
panions was derived; and afterwards they began to use
animals. For it is natural to man to eat flesh, but con-
trary to his nature to eat it raw. Fire, therefore, being
discovered, they embraced what is natural, and admitted
the eating of boiled and roasted flesh. Hence lynxes are
[said by Homer® to be] crudivorous, or eaters of raw flesh ;
and of Priam, also, he says, as a disgraceful circum-
stance, ΄

Raw flesh by you, O Priam, is devoured ",
And,

Raw flesh, dilacerating, he devouredi.

And this is said, as if the eating of raw flesh per-
tained to the impious. Tetemachus, also, whem Minerva
was his guest, placed before her not raw, but roasted
flesh. At first, therefore, men did not eat animals, for
man is not [naturally] a devourer of raw flesh. But
when the use of fire was discovered, fire was employed
not only for the cooking of flesh, but also for most other
eatables. For that man is not [naturally] adapted to eat

ε Thad, XI. v. 479. h Tliad, IV. v. 35.
T Jliad, XXII. v. 347.

͵

12 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

raw flesh, is evident from certain nations that feed on_
fishes. For these ‘they roast, some. upon stones that
are very much heated by the sun; but others roast. them
in the sand. That man, however, is adapted to feed on
flesh, is evident from this, that no nation abstains from
animal food. Nor is this adopted by the Greeks through
depravity, since the same custom is admitted by the bar-
barians.

14. But he who forbids men to feed on animals, and
thinks it is unjust, will also say that it is not just to kill
them, and deprive them of life. Nevertheless, an innate
and just war is implanted in us against brutes. For some
of them voluntarily attack men, as, for instance, wolves
and-lions ; others not voluntarily, as serpents, since they
bite not, except they are trampled on. And some,
indeed, attack men; but others destroy the fruits of the
earth. From all these causes, therefore, we do not spare
the life of brutes; but we destroy those who commence
hostilities against us, as also those who do not, lest
we should suffer any evil from them. . For there is no one
who, if he sees a serpent, will not, if he is able, destroy it,
in order that neither it, nor any other serpent, may bite a
man. And this arises, not only from our hatred of those
that are the destroyers of our race, but likewise from
that kindness which subsists between one man and
another. But though the war against brutes is just, yet
we abstain from many which associate with men. Hence,
the Greeks do not feed either on dogs, or horses, or
asses, because of these, those that are tame are of the
same species as the wild, Nevertheless, they eat swine
and birds. For a hog is not useful for any thing but
food. The Phecenicians, however, and Jews, abstain from
it, because, in short, it is not produced in those places.
. For it is said, that this animal is not seen in Ethiopia
even at present. As, therefore, no Greek sacrifices
a camel or an elephant to the Gods, because Greece does
not produce these animals, so neither is a hog sacrificed
to the Gods in Cyprus or Phenicia, because it is not

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. 1 19
indigenous in those places. And, for the same reason,
neither do the Egyptians sacrifice this animal to the
Gods. In short, that some nations abstain from a hog, is
similar to our being unwilling to eat the flesh of camels.

15. But why should any one abstain from animals?
Is it because feeding on them makes the soul or the body
worse? It is, however, evident, that neither of these is
deteriorated by it. For those animals that feed on flesh ©
are more sagacious than others, as they are venatic, and
possess an art, by which they supply themselves with
food, and acquire power and strength; as‘is evident
in lions and wolves. So that the eating of flesh neither
injures the soul nor the body. This likewise is manifest,
both from the athlete, whose bodies become stronger
by feeding on flesh, and from. physicians, who restore
bodies to health by the use of animal food. For this
- is no small indication that Pythagoras did not think
sanely, that none of the wise men embraced his opinion ;
since neither any one of the seven wise men, nor any
of the physiologists who lived after them, nor even the
most wise Socrates, or his followers, adopted it.

16. Let it, however, be admitted that all men are
persuaded of the truth of this dogma, respecting absti-
nence from animals. But what will be the boundary of
the propagation of animals? For no one is ignorant how
numerous the progeny is of the swine and the hare.
And to these add all other animals. Whence, therefore,
will they be supplied with pasture? And what will hus-
bandmen do? For they will not destroy those who destroy
the fruits of the earth. And the earth will not ‘be able
to bear the multitude of animals. Corruption also will
be produced from the putridity of those that will die.
' And thus, from pestilence taking place, no refuge will
be left. For the sea, and rivers, and marshes, will be
filled with fishes, and the air with birds, but the earth
will-be full of reptiles of every kind.

17. How many likewise will be prevented from hay-
ing their diseases cured, if animals are abstained from ?

14 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

For we see that those who are blind recover their sight
by eating a viper. A servant of Craterus, the physician,
happening to be seized with a new kind of disease, in
which the flesh fell away from the bones, derived no
benefit from medicines ; but by eating a viper prepared
after the manner of a fish, the flesh became conglutinated
to the bones, and he was restored to health. Many
other animals also, and their several parts, cure diseases
when they are properly used for that purpose; of all which
remedies he will be frustrated who rejects animal food.

18. But if, as they say, plants also have a soul, what
will become of our life if we neither destroy animals
nor plants? If, however, he is not impious who cuts
off plants, neither will he who kills animals.

19. But some one may, perhaps, say it is not proper
to destroy that which belongs to the same tribe with
ourselves; if the souls of animals are of the same essence
with ourselves. If, however, it should be granted that
souls are inserted in bodies voluntarily, it must be said
that if is through a love of juvenility: for in the season
of youth there is an enjoyment of all things. Why,
therefore, do they not again enter into the nature of
man’? But if they enter voluntarily, and for the sake of
juvenility, and pass through every species of animals,
they will be much gratified by being destroyed. For
thus their return to the human form will be more rapid.
The bodies also which are eaten will not produce any
pain in the souls of those bodies, in consequence of the
souls being liberated from them; and they will love to
be implanted in the nature of man. Hence, as much as
they are pained on leaving the human form, so much will
they rejoice when they leave other bodies. For thus
they will more swiftly become man again, who predo-
minates over all irrational animals, in the same manner
as God does over men. There is, therefore, a sufficient
cause for destroying other animals, viz. their acting
unjustly in destroying men. But if the souls of men
_are immortal, but those of irrational animals mortal, men

ANIMAL FOOD.—-BOOK I. 1S

ΝΕ ,
will not act unjustly by destroying irrational animals.
And if the souls of brutes:are immortal, we shall benefit
them by liberating them from their bodies. For, by
killing them, we shall cause them to return to the human
nature. z

20. If, however, we [only] defend ourselves [in put-
ting animals to death], we do not act unjustly, but we
take vengeance on those that injure us. Hence, if the
souls of brutes are indeed immortal, we benefit them by
.destroying them. But if their souls are mortal, we do
nothing impious in putting them to death. And if we
defend ourselves against them, how is it possible that in
so doing we should not act justly. For we destroy,
indeed, a serpent and a scorpion, though they do not
attack us, in order that some other person may not be
injured by them; and in so doing we defend the human
race in general. But shall we not act justly in putting
those animals to death, which either attack men, or those
that associate with men, or injure the fruits of the earth ?

21. If, however, some one should, nevertheless, think
it Is unjust to destroy brutes, such a one should neither
use milk, nor wool, nor sheep, nor honey. For, as you
injure a man by taking from him his garments, thus, also,
you injure a sheep by shearing it. For the wool which
you take from it is its vestment. Miulk, hkewise, was
not produced for you, but for the young of the animal
that has it. The bee also collects honey as food for
itself; which you, by taking away, administer to your
own pleasure. I pass over in silence the opinion of the
Egyptians, that we act unjustly by meddling with plants.
But if these things were produced for our sake, then the
bee, being ministrant to us, elaborates honey, and the’
wool grows on the back of sheep, that it may be an orna-
ment to us, and afford us a bland heat.

22. Co-operating also with the Gods themselves in
what contributes to piety, we sacrifice animals: for, of
the Gods, Apollo, indeed, is called λυκοκτονος, the slayer of
wolves; and Diana, θηροκτονος, the destroyer of wild beasts.

16 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

Demi-gods likewise, and all the heroes who excel us
both in origin and virtue, have so much approved of the
slaughter of animals, that they have sacrificed to the Gods
Dodeceides* and Hecatombs. But Hercules, among other
things, is celebrated for being an ox-devourer.

23. It is, however, stupid to say that Pythagoras
exhorted men to abstain from animals, in order that he
might, in the greatest possible degree, prevent them from
eating each other. For, if all men at the time of Pytha-
goras were anthropophagites, he must be delirious who
drew men away from other animals, in order that they
_ might abstain from devouring each other. For, on this
account, he ought rather to have exhorted them to
become anthropophagites, by showing them that it was an
equal crime to devour each other, and to eat the flesh
᾿ οὗ oxen and swine. But if men at that time did not eat
each other, what occasion was there for this dogma?
And if he established this law for himself and his asso-
ciates, the supposition that he did so is disgraceful. For
it demonstrates that those who lived with Pythagoras
were anthropophagites.

24. For we say that the very contrary of what he con-
jectured ‘would happen. For, if we abstained from ani-
mals, we should not only be deprived of pleasure and
riches of this kind, but we should also lose our fields,
which would be destroyed by wild beasts; since the
whole earth would be occupied by serpents and birds, so
that it would be difficult to plough the land; the scat-.
tered seeds would immediately be gathered by the birds ;
and all such fruits as had arrived at perfection, would
be consumed by quadrupeds. But men being oppressed
by such a want of food, would be compelled, by bitter
necessity, to attack each other. .

25. Moreover, the Gods themselves, for the sake of a
‘remedy, have delivered mandates to many persons about
sacrificing animals. For history is full of instances of

-k 7, e, Sacrifices from twelve animals.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I, "17

"(6 Gods having ordered certain persons to βδοίῆοθ.
~ animals, and, when sacrificed, to eat them. For, in the
return of the Heraclide, those who engaged'‘in war
against Lacedemon, in conjunction with Eurysthenes
and Proscles, through a want of necessaries, were com-
pelled to eat serpents, which the land at that time
_ afforded for the nutriment of the army. In Libya, also,
‘a cloud: of locusts fell for the relief of another army that
was oppressed by hunger. The same thing likewise hap-
pened at Gades. Bogus was a king of the Mauritanians, |
who was slain by Agrippa in Mothone. He in that
place attacked the temple of Hercules, which was most
rich. But it was the custom of the priests daily to
sprinkle the altar with blood. That this, however, was
not effected by the decision of men, but by that of
divinity, the occasion at that time demonstrated. For,
the siege being continued for a long time, victims were
wanting. But the priest being dubious how he should
act, had the following vision in a dream. He seemed
to himself to be standing in the middle of the pillars
of the temple of Hercules, and afterwards to see a bird
sitting opposite to the altar, and endeavouring to fly
to it, but which at length flew into his hafids. He
also saw that the altar was sprinkled with its blood.
Seeing this, he rose as soon as it was day, and went
to the altar, and standing on the turret, as he thought he
did in his dream, he looked round, and saw the very bird
which he had seen in his sleep. Hoping, therefore, that
his dream would be fulfilled, he stood still, saw the bird
fly to the altar and sit upon it, and deliver itself into the
hands of the high priest. Thus the bird was sacrificed,
and the altar sprinkled with blood, That, however,
which happened at Cyzicus, is still more celebrated than
this event. For Mithridates having besieged this city,
the festival of Proserpine was then celebrated, in which
it was requisite to sacrifice an ox. But the sacred
herds, from which it was necessary the victim should be
C . |

ὃ. (ῸΝ ABSTINENCE: FROM

taken, fed opposite to the city, on the continent’: and
one of them was already marked for this purpase. When,
therefore, the hour demanded the sacrifice, the ox lowed;
and swam over the sea, and the. guards of the city opened
the gates to it. Then the ox directly ran into the city,
and stood at the altar, and was sacrificed to the Goddess.
Not unreasonably, therefore, was it thought to be most
pious to sacrifice many animals, since it appeared that
the sacrifice of them was pleasing to the Gods.

26. But what would be the condition of a city, if all
the citizens were of this opinion, [viz. that they should
abstain from destroying animals?] For how would they’
repel their enemies, when they were attacked by them;
if they were careful in the extreme not-to kill any one of
them? In this case, indeed, they must be immediately
destroyed. And it would be tog prolix to narrate other
difficulties and inconveniences, which would necessarily
take place. That it is not, however, impious to slay and
feed on animals, is evident from this, that Pythagoras
himself, though those prior to him permitted the athlete
to drink milk, and to eat cheese, irrigated with water ;
᾿ but others, posterior to him, rejecting this diet, fed them
with dry; figs; yet he, abrogating the anctent custom,
allowed them to feed on flesh, and found that such a
diet greatly increased their strength. Some also relate,
that the Pythagoreans themselves did not spare animals
when they sacrificed to the gods. Such, therefore, are
the arguments of Clodius, Heraclides Ponticus, Her-
machus the Epicurean, and the Stoics and Peripatettcs,
[against abstinence from animal food]: among which
also are comprehended the arguments which were sent
to us by you, O Castricius. As, however, I intend to
oppose these opinions, and those of the multitude, I may
reasonably premise what follows.

- 27. In the first place, therefore, it must be known

! For Cyzicus was situated in an island.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. 10.

that my discourse does not bring with it an exhortation,
to every description of men. For it is not directed to
those who. are occupied in sordid mechanical arts, nor to
these who are engaged in athletic exercises; neither ta
soldiers, nor sailors, nor: rhetoricians, nor to those who.
lead: an active life. But I write.to the man who con-
mders what he is, whence he came, and whither he ought
to. tend, and’ who, in what pertains to nutriment, and
other necessary concerns, is different from those who
propose to themselves other kinds of life; for ta none
but such as these do I direct my discourse. For, neither
in this common life can there be gne and. the same
exhortation to the sleeper, who endeavours to obtain
sleep through the whole of life; and who, for this purpose,
procures from all places things of a soporiferous nature,
as there is to him who ig anxious to repel sleep, and ta -
dispose every thing about him to a vigilant condition.
But to the former it is necessary to recommend intoxi-
cation, surfeiting, and satiety, end to exhort him to
choose a dark house, and

A bed laxuriant, broad, and soft,—

as the poete say; and that he should procure for himself _
all such things as are of a soporiferous nature, and which
are effective of sluggishness and oblivion, whether they
are odours, or ointments, or are liquid or solid medicines,
And to the latter it is requisite to advise the use of
a drink sober and without wine, food of an attenuated
nature, and almost approaching to fasting; a house lucid,
and participating of a subtle air and wind, and to urge
him to be strenuously excited by solicitude and thought,

and to prepare for himself a small and hard hed. But,

whether we are naturally adapted to this, I mean to
a vigilant life, so as to grant as little as possible to sleep,
since we do not dwell among those who are perpetually
vigilant, or whether we are designed to be im a sopo-
riferous state of existence, is the business of another dis-

20 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

cussion, and is a subject which Tequires very extended
demonstrations.

28. To the man, however, who once suspects the
enchantients attending our journey through the present
life, and belonging to the place in which we dwell; who
also perceives himself to be naturally vigilant, and con-
siders the somniferous nature of the region which he
inhabits ;— to this man addressing ourselves, we pre-
scribe food consentaneous to his suspicion and know-
ledge of this terrene abode, and exhort him to suffer the
somnolent to be stretched on their beds, dissolved in
sleep. For it is requisite to be cautious, lest as those.
who look on the blear-eyed contract an ophthalmy, and
as we gape when present with those who are gaping,
so we should be filled with drowsiness and sleep, when
the region. which we inhabit is cold, and adapted to fill
the eyes with rheum, as being of a marshy nature, and
drawing down all those that dwell in it to a somniferous
and oblivious condition. If, therefore, legislators had
ordained. laws for cities, with a: view to a contemplative
and intellectual life, it would certainly be requisite to be
obedient to those laws, and to comply with what they
instituted concerning food. But if they established their
laws, looking to a life according to nature, and which is
said to rank as a medium, [between the irrational and the
intellectual life,] and to what the vulgar admit, who con-
ceive externals, and things which pertain to the body
to be good or evil, why should any one, adducing their
laws, endeavour to subvert a life, which is more excellent
than every law which is written and ordained for the mul-
titude, and which is especially conformable to an unwritten
and divine law? For such is the truth of the case.

29. The contemplation which procures for us felicity,
does not consist, as some one may think it does, in a
multitude of discussions and disciplines; nor does it
receive any increase by a quantity of words. For if this
were the case, nothing would prevent those from being

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. 21

happy by whom all disciplines are collected together [and
comprehended]. Now, however, every discipline by no
means gives completion to this contemplation, nor even
the disciplines which pertain to truly existing beings,
unless ‘there is a conformity to them of our nature™ and
life. For since there are, as it is said, in every purpose
three" ends, the end with us is to obtain the contempla-
tion of real being, the attainment of it procuring, as much
as it is possible for us, a conjunction of the contemplator
with the object of contemplation. For the reascent of
the soul is not to any thing else than true being itself,
nor is its conjunction with any other thing. But intellect
‘is truly-existing being ; so that the end is to live accord-
ing to intellect. Hence such discussions and exoteric
disciplines as impede our purification, do not give com-
‘pletion to our felicity. If, therefore, felicity consisted
in literary attainments, this end might ,be obtained by
those who pay no attention to their food and their
actions. But since for this purpose it is requisite to
exchange the life which the multitude lead for another,
‘and to become purified both in words and deeds, let
‘us consider what reasonings and what works will enable
us to obtain this end. .

30. Shall we say, therefore, that they will be such
as separate us from sensibles, and the passions which
pertain to them, and which elevate us as much as possible
to an intellectual, unimaginative, and impassive life; but
that the contraries to these are foreign, and deserve to be
rejected? And this by so much the more, as_ they
separate us from a life according to intellect. But, I
think, it must be admitted, that we. should follow the

object to which intellect attracts us. For we resemble
those who enter into, or depart from a foreign region,

™ In the original sav jan προσ natn κατ᾽ aura φυσιωσις καὶ ζαη; ‘bat i it is
obviously necessary for φυσιωσις to read φυσις,

Ὁ viz. As it appears to me, a pleasurable, a profitable, and a virtuous
end, which last is a truly beautiful and good end.

22 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

not only because we are banished from our intimate.
associates, but in consequence of dwelling in a foreign
land, we are filled with barbaric passions, and manners,
and legal institutes, and to all these have a great propen-
sity. Hence, he who wishes to return to his proper
kindred and associates, should not only with alacrity
begin the journey, but, in order that he may be properly
received, should meditate how he may divest himself
of every thing of a foreign nature which he has assumed,
and should recall to: his memory such things as he
has forgotten, and without which he cannot be admitted
by his kindred and friends. After the same manner,
also, it is necessary, if we intend to return to things
whith are truly our own, that we should divest ourselves
of every thing of a mortal nature which we have assumed,
together with an adhering affection towards it, and which
is the cause of our descent [into this terrestrial region ;}
and that we should excite our recollection of that blessed
and eternal essence, and should hasten our return to
‘the nature which is without colour and without quality,
earnestly endeavouring to accomplish two things; one,
that we may cast aside every thing material and mortal ;
but the other, that we may properly return, and be again
conversant with our true kindred, ascending to them in a
way contrary to that'in which we descended hither. For
we were intellectual natures, and we still are essences
purified from all sense and irrationality ; but we are com-
plicated with sensibles, through our incapability of eter-
nally associating with the intelligible, and through the
power of being conversant with terrestrial concerns. For
all the powers which energize in conjunction with sense
and body, are injured, in consequence of the soul not
abiding in the intelligible; (just as the earth, when in
a bad condition, though it frequently receives the seed
of wheat, yet produces nothing but tares), and this is
through a .certain depravity of the -soul, which does
not indeed destroy its essence from the generation of

ANIMAL FOOD.~—-BOOK I. 23

irrationality, ‘but through this is conjoined with a-mortal
nature, and is: drawn down from its own proper to a
foreign condition of being. ες

31, ‘So that, if we are desirous of returning to those
natures with’ which we formerly associated, we must
endeavour to the utmost of our power to withdraw our-
selves from sense and imagination, and the irrationality
with which they are attended, and also.from the passions
which subsist about them, as far as the necessity of our
condition -m this life will permit. But such things as
pertain to intellect should be distinctly arranged, pro-
curing for ‘it peace and quiet from the war with the
irrational part; that we may not only be. auditors of
intellect and intelligibles, but may as much as possible
enjoy the contemplation of :them, and, being established
in an incorporeal nature, may truly live through intellect ;
and not falsely in conjunction with things allied to
‘bodies. We must therefore divest ourselves of our
manifold garments, both of this visible and fleshly vest-
ment, and.of those with which we are internally clothed,
and which are proximate to our cutaneous habiliments ;
and we must enter the stadium naked and unclothed,
striving for [the most glorious of all prizes] the Olympia
of the soul. The first thing, however, and without which
‘we cannat contend, is to divest ourselves of our gar-
ments. But since of these some are external and others
internal, thus also with respect to the denudation, one
kind is through things which are apparent, but another
through such as are more unapparent. Thus, for instance,
not to eat, or not to receive what is offered.to us, belongs to
things which are immediately obvious; but not to desire
is.a thing more obscure ; so that, together with deeds, we
must also withdraw ourselves from an adhering affection
and passion towards them. For what benefit shall we
derive by abstaining from deeds, when at the same time
‘we tenaciously adhere to the causes from which the
deeds proceed ?. .

32. But this departure [from sense, imagination, and

24 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

irrationality,] may be effected by. violence, and also
, by persuasion and by reason; through the wasting away,
and, as it may be said, oblivion and death of the pas-
sions ; which, indeed, 15 the best kind of departure, since
it is accomplished without oppressing that from. which
we are divulsed; For, in sensibles, a divulsion by force
is not effected without either a laceration of a part; of a
vestige of avulsion. But this separation is. introduced by
a continual negligence of the passions. ‘And this negli- ~
‘gence is produced by an abstinence from those sensible
perceptions which excite the passions, and by a perse-
vering attention to intelligibles. And among these pas-
sions or perturbations, those which arise from food ate to
be enumerated:

33. We should therefore abstain, no less than from
other things, from certain food, viz..such as is naturally _
adapted to excite the passive part of our soul, concerning
which it will be requisite to consider as follows: There
are two fountains whose streams irrigate the bond by
which the soul is bound to the body; and from which
the. soul being filled as with deadly potions, becomes
oblivious of the proper objects of her. contemplation.
These fountains.are pleasure and pain; of which sense
indeed is preparative, and the perception which is accord-
ing to sense, together with the imaginations, opinions,
and recollections which accompany the senses. But
from these, the passions being excited, and the whole of
the irrational nature becoming fattened, the soul is drawn
downward, and abandons its proper love of true being.
As much as possible, therefore, we must separate our-
selves from these: But the separation must be effected
by an avoidance of the passions which subsist through
the senses and the irrational part. But the senses are
employed either on objects of the sight, or of the hearing,
or of the taste, or the smell, or the touch; for sense is as
‘it were the metropolis of that foreign colony of passions
which we contain. Let us, therefore, consider how much
fuel of the passions enters into us through each of

ANIMAL FOOD.~—BOOK I. 28

the senses. For this is effeeted partly by the view of
the contests of horses and the athlete, or those whose
bodies are contorted in dancing; and partly from the
survey of beautiful women. For these, ensnaring the
irrational nature, attack and subjugate it by. all-various
deceptions.

, 34. For the soul, being agitated with Bacchic- fory
through all these by the irrational part, is made to leap,
‘to exclaim and vociferate, the external tumult being
inflamed by the internal, and whieh was first enkindled
by sense. But the excitations through the ears, and
which are of ἃ. passive nature, are produced by certain
noises and sounds, by indecent language and defamation,
so that many through these being exiled from reason, are
furiously agitated, and some, becoming effeminate, exhibit
all-various conyolutions of the body. And who 18
ignorant how much the use of fumigations, and ‘the
exhalations of sweet odours, with which lovers supply the
objects of their love, fatten the irrational part of the:
soul? But what occasion 18 there to speak of the passions
produced through the taste? For here, especially, there
is a complication of a twofold bond; one which is
fattened by the passions excited by the taste; and the
other, which we render heavy and powerful, by the intro-
duction of foreign bodies [#. e.. of bodies: different from
our own]. For, as a certain physician said, those.are not
the only poisons which are prepared by the medical art;
but those hkewise which we daily assume for food, both
in what we eat, and what we drink, and a thing of
a much more deadly nature is imparted to. the soul
through these, than from. the poisons which are com-
pounded for the purpose of destroying the body. And
as to the touch, it does all but transmute the soul into the
body, and produces in it certain inarticulate sounds, such
as frequently take place in inanimate bodies. And from
all these, recollections, imaginations, and opinions being
collected together, excite a swarm of passions, viz. of

ο6 ON ABSTINENCE FKOM.

fear, desire, anger, love, voluptuousness*, pain, emula-
tion, solicitude, and disease, and cause the soul.to be full
of similar perturbations.

35. Hence, to be purified from all these ; is most diffi
cult, and requires a great.contest, and we must bestow
much labour both by night and by day to be liberated
from an attention to them, and this, because we are
necessarily complicated with sense.. Whence, also, 85
much as possible, we should withdraw ourselves from
those places in which we may, though unwillingly, meet .
with this hostile crowd. From experience, also, we
. should avoid a contest with it, and even a victory over it
and the want of exercise from inexperience.

36. For we learn, that this conduct was. adopted
‘by some of the celebrated ancient Pythagoreans and wise
men; some of whom dwelt in the most solitary places;
but others in temples and sacred groves, from which,
though they were in cities,.all tumult and the multitude
“were expelled. But Plato chose to reside in the Academy,
a place not only solitary and remote from the city,. but
᾿ which was also said to be insalubrious. Others have not
spared even their eyes, through a desire of not being
divulsed from the inward contemplation [of reality]. If
some one, however, at the same time that he is -con-
versant with men, and: while he is filling his senses. with
the passions pertaining to them, should fancy that he can
remain impassive, he .18 ignorant that he both deceives
himself and those who are persuaded. by him, nor does he
see that we are enslaved to many passions, through not
-alienating ourselves from the multitude. For he did not
speak vainly, and in such a way as to falsify the nature
of [the Coryphzan] philosophers, who :said of them,
“ These, therefore, from their youth, neither know the
way to the forum, nor. where the court. of justice or
senate-house is situated, or any common place of assembly
belonging to the city. They likewise neither hear nor

© For φιλυῥων here, I read psarndouey,

ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK ‘1. 27

see laws, or decrees, whether orally promulgated ot ᾿
written. And as to the ardent endeavours of ‘their com-
panions to.obtain magistracies, the associations of these,
their: banquets and .wanton feastings, ‘accompanied by
pipers, these they do not even dream of accomplishing.
But whether any thing in the city. has happened well
or ill, or what ‘evil has befallen any one from his: pro-
genitors,. whether male or female, these are more con-
céaled from ‘such a one, than, as. it is said, how many
measures called choes the sea contains. . And ‘besides
this, he is even ignorant that he is ignorant? of all these
particulars. For he does not abstain from them for
the sake of renown, but, in reality, his body only dwells,
‘and is conversant in the city; but his reasoning power
‘considering all these as trifling and of no value, “ he is
‘borne away,” according to Pindar, ‘‘on. ail sides, and does
not apply himself to any thing which is near.”

37. In what is here said, Plato asserts, that the
-Corypheean philosopher, by not at all mingling himself
with the above-mentioned particulars, remains impassive
‘tothem. Hence, he neither knows the way to the court
-of justice nor the senate-house, nor any thing else which
thas been before. enumerated.. He does not say, indeed,
‘that he knows and is conversant with these particulars,
-and that, being conversant, and filling his senses with them,
‘yet does not know any thing about them ; but,on the con- |
‘trary, he says, that abstaining from them, he is ignorant that
“he is ignorant of them. He also adds, that this philo-
‘sopher does not even dream of betaking himself to banquets.
“Much less, therefore, would he be indignant, if deprived
of broth, or pieces of flesh; nor, in short, will he admit

P The multitude are ignorant that they are ignorant with respect to
“objects of’ all others the most splendid and real; but the Coryphxan
philosopher is ignorant that he is ignorant with respect to objects most
"unsubstantial and obscure. The former ignorance is the consequence of
a defect, but the latter of a transcendency of gnostic energy. What
Porphyry here says of the Coryphezan philosopher, is derived from the
Theztetus of Plato.

Λ

28 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

things of this kind. And will he not rather consider the
abstinence from all these as trifling, and a thing of no
consequence, but the assumption of them to be.a thing of
great importance and noxious? For since there are two
paradigms in the order of things, one of a divine nature,
which is most happy, the other of that which is destitute

of divinity, and which is most miserable4; the Corypheen
philosopher will assimilate himself to the one, but will

render himself dissimilar to the other, and will lead a life
conformable to the paradigm to which. he is assimilated,
viz. a life satisfied with slender food, and sufficient to

itself, and in the smallest degree replete with mortal

natures.
..38. Hence, as long as any one 18 discordant about

food, and contends that this or that thing should be
-eaten, but does not conceive that, if it were ‘possible, we

should abstain from all food, assenting by this contention
to his passions, such a one forms a vain opinion, as if the
subjects of his dissension were things of no consequence.

᾿ He, therefore, who philosophizes, will not separate him-

self .[from his terrestrial bonds]: by violence; for he who
is compelled to do this, nevertheless remains there from
whence he -was forced to depart. Nor must it be
thought, that he who strengthens these bonds, effects ἃ
thing of small importance. So that only granting to |

nature what is necessary, and this of a light quality, and

through more slender food, he will reject whatever

-exceeds this, as only contributing to pleasure. For he
will be persuaded of the truth of what Plato says, that

sense is a nail by which the soul is fastened to bodies’,
through the agglutination of the passions, and the enjoy-
ment of corporeal delight. For if sensible perceptions
were no impediment to the pure energy of the soul, why
would it be a thing of a dire nature to be in body, while

4 See p. 52 of my translation-of the Theatetus of Plato, from which

Dialogue, what Porphyry here says as well as what he a little before said,
is derived.

τ See the Phado of Plato, where this is asserted.

2

-

ANIMAL FOOD. —BOOK I. 29

at the same time the soul Temained impassive to the
motions of. the body?:
- 39. How is it, also, that you have decided and said,
that you are not passive to things: which you suffer, and
that you are not present with things by which you
are passively affected? For intellect, indeed, is present
with itself, though we are not. present with it. But
he who departs from intellect, is ‘in that place to which
he departs ; and when,:by discursive energies, he applies
himself upwards and downwards by his apprehension of
things, he is there where his apprehension is. But it
is one thing not to attend to sensibles, in consequence of
being present with other things,.and another for a man
to think, that though he: attends to sensibles yet he is
not present with them. Nor can any one. show that
Plato admits this, without at the same time demon- —
strating himself to be deceived. He, therefore, who sub-
mits to the assumption of [every. kind. of] food, and
voluntarily betakes himself to [alluring] spectacles, to
conversation with. the multitude, and laughter; such
‘a.one, by thus acting, is there. where the passion is which
he sustains. But he who abstains from these in conse-
quence of being present with other things, he it is
‘who, through his unskilfulness, not only excites laughter
in Thracian maid-servants, but in the rest of the vulgar,
and when he sits at a banquet, falls into the greatest per-
plexity, not from any defect of sensation, or froma superior
accuracy of sensible perception,.and energizing with the
irrational part of the soul alone; for Plato does. not.
-venture to assert this; but because, in slanderous con-
versation, he has nothing reproachful to say of any: one,
as not knowing any evil of any one, because he has
not made individuals the subject of his meditation.
Being in such perplexity, therefore, he appears, says
Plato, to be ridiculous; and in the praises and boastings
of others, as he is manifestly seen to laugh, not dissem-
blingly, but, in reality, he appears to be.delirious.. _ .
40. So that, through ignorance of, and abstaining
P |

7

80 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

from sensible concerns, he is unacquainted with them.
_ But it is by no means to be admitted, that though
he should be familiar with sensibles, and should energize
through the irrational part, yet it is possible for him
fat the same time] genumely to survey the objects of
intellect. For neither do they who aseert that we have
two souls, admit that we can attend at one and the same
time to two different thiags. For thus they would make
& conjunction of two animals, which being employed
in different energies, the one would not be able to per-
δεῖνα the operations of the other.

4]. But why would it be requisite that the passions
should waste away, that we should die with respect to
them, ‘and that this should .be daily the subject of our
meditation, if it was possible for us, as some assert,
to energize according to intellect, though we are at the
sme time intimately connected with mortal concerns, and
this without the intuition of intellect? For intellect sees,
ahd intellect hears [as Epicharmus says]. But if, while
eating luxuriously, and drinking the sweetest wine, it
were possible to be present with immaterial natures, why
may not this be frequently effected while you are present
with, and are performing things which it is not becoming
even to mention? For these passions every where pro-
ceed from the δου" which is in us. And you certainly
will admit that the baser these passions are, the more we
ere drawn down towards them. For what will be the
distinction which owght here to be made, if you admit
that to some things it is not possible to be passive, with-
out being present with them, but that you may ac-
complish other things, at the same time that you are
surveying intelligibles? For it is not because some things
are apprehended to be base by the multitude, but others
not. For all the above mentioned passions are base.
So that to the attainment of a life according to mteliedt,

* Sense, and that which is beautifal in 1 the energies of sense, are thus
‘denominated by Plato.

- ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK 1. $f

it is requisite to abstain from all these, in the samd
manner as from venereal concerns. To nature therefore;
bat‘ little food must be granted, through the necessity
of generation [or of our connexion with a flowing con-
dition of being.] For, where sense and sensible appre-
hension are, there a departure and separation from thé
intelligible take place; and by how much stronger the
excitation is of the irrational part, by so much the greater
is the departure from intellection. For it is not possible
for us to be botne along to this place and to that, whilé
we are here, and yet be there, [i.e. be present with an .
intelligible essence.] For our attentions to things are
not effected with a part, but with the whole of ourselves.
42. But to fancy that he who is passively affected
according to sense, may, nevertheless, energize. about .
intelligibles, has precipitated many of the Barbarians to
destruction; who: arrogantly assert, that though they
indulge in every kind of pleasure, yet they are able to
convert themselves to things.of a different nature from
sensibles, at thé same time that they are enervizing with
the irrational part. For I have heard some persons
patronizing their infelicity after the following manner.
“ We are not,” say they, “ defiled by food, as neither is
the sea by the filth of rivers. For we have dominion
over all eatables, in the same manner as the sea over all
humidity. But if the sea should shut up its mouth, so
as not to receive the streams that now flow into it, it
would be indeed, with respect to itself, great; but, with
respect to the world, small, as not being able to receive
dirt and corruption. If, however, it was afraid of bemg
defiled, it would not receive these streams; but knowing
its own magnitude, it receives all things, arid is not
averse to any thing which proceeds intd it. In like
wnanner, say they, we also, if we were afraid of food,
should be enslaved by the conception of fear. But it is
requisite that all things should be obedient to us. For,
if we collect a little water, indeed, which has received
any filth, it becomes immediately defiled and oppressed

32 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

by the filth; but this is not the case with the profound
sea. Thus, also, aliments vanquish the pusillanimous ;
but where there 18 an immense liberty with respect to
food, all things are received for nutriment, and no defile-
ment is produced.” These men, therefore, deceiving
themselves by arguments of this kind, act in a manner
conformable to their deception. But, instead of obtaining
liberty, being precipitated into an abyss of infelicity,
they are suffocated. This, also, induced some of the
Cynics to be desirous of eating every kind of food, in
consequence of their pertinaciously adhering to the cause
of errors, which we are accustomed to call a thing of an
indifferent nature.

43. The man, however, who is cautious, and is.susp!=
cious of the enchantments of nature, who has surveyed
the essential properties of body, and knows. that it was
adapted as an instrument to the powers of the soul, will
_ also know how readily passion is prepared to accord with
the body, whether we are willing or not, when any thing
external strikes it, and the pulsation at length arrives at
perception. For perception is, as it were, an answer [to
that which causes the perception.] But the soul cannot
answer unless she wholly converts herself to the sound,
and transfers her animadversive eye to the pulsation. In
short, the irrational part not being able to judge to what
extent, how, whence, and what thing ought to be the
object of attention, but of itself being inconsiderate, like
horses. without a charioteer‘; whither it verges down-
ward, thither it is borne along, without any power of
governing itself m things external. Nor does it know
the fit time or the measure of the food which. should
be taken, unless the eye of the charioteer is attentive
to it, which regulates and governs the motions of irra-
tionality, this part of the soul being essentially blind.

ἐ The rational part of the soul is assimilated by Plato, in the Phedrus,
to a charioteer, and the two irrational parts, desire and anger, to two
horses. ee my translation of that Dialogue.

ANIMAE FOOD.—BOOK I. 392

But he who takes away from reason its dominion over
the irrational part, and permits it to be borne along,
conformably to its proper nature: such a.one, yielding
to desire and anger, will suffer them to proceed to what-
ever extent they please. On the contrary, the worthy
man will so act that his deeds may be conformable to
presiding reason, even in the energies of the irrational
part.

44. And in this the worthy appears to differ from the
depraved man, that the former has every where reason
present, governing and guiding, like a charioteer, the
Irrational part; but the latter performs many things
without reason for his guide. Hence the latter is said
to be most irrational, and is borne along in a disorderly
manner by irrationality ; but the former.is obedient to
reason, and superior to every irrational desire. This,
_ therefore, is the cause why the multitude err in words
and deeds, in desire and anger, and why, on the contrary,
good men act with rectitude, viz. that the former suffer
the boy within them to do whatever it pleases; but the
latter give themselves up to the guidance of the tutor of
the boy, [. 6. to reason] and govern what pertains to
themselves in conjunction with it. Hence in food, and
in other corporeal energies and enjoyments, the cha-
rioteer being present, defines what is commensurate and
opportune. But when the charioteer is absent, and, as
some say, is occupied in his own concerns, then, if he
also has with him our attention, he does not permit
it. to be disturbed, or at all to energize with the rational
power. If, however, he should permit our attention to
be directed to the boy, unaccompanied by himself, he
would destroy the man, who would be precipitately borne
along by the folly of the irrational part. |

45. Hence, to worthy men, abstinence in food, and in
corporeal enjoyments and actions, is more appropriate
than abstinence in what pertains to the touch ; because
though, while we touch bodies, it is necessary we should
descend from our proper manners to the instruction of

D

34 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

that which is most irrational in us; yet this is still more
necessary in thé assumption of food. For the irrational
nature is incapable of considering what will be the effect
of it, because this part of the soul is essentially ignorant
of that which is absent. But, with respect to food, if it
were possible to be liberated from it, in the same manner
as from visible objects, when they are removed from the
view; for we can attend to other things when the ima-
gination is withdrawn from them; — if this were possible,
it would be no great undertaking to be immediately
emancipated from the necessity of the mortal nature, by
yielding, in a small degree, to it. Since, however, a
prolongation of time in cooking and digesting food, and
together with this the co-operation of sleep and rest,
are requisite, and, after these, a certaim temperament
from digestion, and a separation of excrements, it is
necessary that the tutor of the boy within us should
be present, who, selecting things of a light nature, and
which will be no impediment to him, may concede these
to nature, in consequence of foreseeing the future, and
the impediment which will be produced by his permitting
the desires to introduce to us a burden not easily to be
borne, through the trifling pleasure arising from the
deglutition of food.

46. Reason, therefore, very properly rejecting the
much and the superfluous, will circumscribe what is
necessary in narrow boundaries, in order that it may not
be molested in procuring what the wants of the body
demand, through many things being requisite ; nor being
attentive to elegance, will it need a multitude of servants ;
nor endeavour to receive much pleasure in eating, nor,
through satiety, to be filled with much indolence; nor
by rendering its burden [the body] more gross, to become
somnolent; nor through the body being replete with
things of a fattening nature, to render the bond more
strong, but himself more sluggish and imbecile in the
performance of his proper works. For, let any man show
us who endeavours as much as possible to live according

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. 35

to intellect, and not to be attracted by the passions of
the body, that animal food is more easily procured than
the food from fruits and herbs; or that the preparation
of the former is more simple than that of the latter, and,
in short, that it does not require cooks, but, when com-
pared with inanimate nutriment, is unattended by plea-
sure, is lighter in concoction, and is more rapidly digested,
excites in a less degree the desires, and contributes less
to the strength of the body than a vegetable diet.

47. If, however, neither any physician, nor philo-
sopher, nor wrestler, nor any one of the vulgar, has dared
to assert this, why should we not willingly abstain from
this corporeal burden? Why should we not, at the same
time, liberate ourselves from many inconveniences by
abandoning a fleshly diet? For we should not be liberated
from one only, but from myriads of evils, by accustoming
ourselves to be satisfied with things of the smallest
nature; viz. we should be freed from a superabundance
of riches, from numerous servants, a multitude of uten-
sils, a somnolent condition, from many and vehement
diseases, from medical assistance, incentives to venery,
more gross exhalations, an abundance of excrements, the
crassitude of the corporeal bond, from the strength which
excites to [base] actions, and, in short, from an Iliad of
evils. But from all these, inanimate and slender food,
and which is easily obtained, will liberate us, and will
procure for us peace, by imparting salvation to our
reasoning power. For, as Diogenes says, thieves and
enemies are not found among those that feed on maize *,
but sycophants and tyrants are produced from those who
feed on flesh. The cause, however, of our being in want
of many things being taken away, together with the
multitude of nutriment introduced into the body, and
also the weight of digestibles bemg lightened, the eye
of the soul will become free, and will be established as in

® A kind of bread made of milk and flour.

36 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

‘a port beyond the smoke and the waves of the corporeal
nature.

48. And this neither requires monition, nor demon-
stration, on account of the evidence with which it is
immediately attended. Hence, not only those who en-
deavour to live according to intellect, and who establish
for themselves an intellectual life, as the end of their
pursuits, have perceived that this abstinence was neces-
sary to the attainment of this end; but, as it appears
to me, nearly every philosopher, preferring frugality to
luxury, has rather embraced a life which is satisfied with
a little, than one that requires a multitude of things.
And, what will seem paradoxical to many, we shall find
that this is asserted and praised by men who thought
that pleasure is the end of those that philosophize. For
most of the Epicureans, beginning from the Corypheus of
their sect, appear to have been satisfied with maize and
fruits, and have filled their writings with showing how
little nature requires, and that its necessities may be
sufficiently remedied by slender and easily-procured food.

49. For the wealth, say they, of nature is definite,
and easily obtained ; but that which proceeds from vain
opinions, is indefinite, and procured with difficulty. For
things which may be readily obtained, remove in a
beautiful and abundantly sufficient manner that which,
through ‘indigence, is the cause of molestation to the
flesh; and these are such as have the simple nature of
moist and dry aliments. But every thing else, say they,
which terminates in luxury, is not attended with a neces-
Sary appetition, nor is it necessarily produced from a
certain something which is in pain; but partly arises
from the molestation and pungency solely proceeding
from something not being present; partly from joy; and
partly from vain and false dogmas, which neither pertain
to any natural defect, nor to the dissolution of the human
frame, those not being present. For things which may
every where be obtained, are sufficient for those purposes

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK 1. 37

which nature necessarily requires. But these, through
their simplicity and paucity, may be easily procured.
And he, indeed, who feeds on flesh, requires also inani- |
mate natures; but he who is satisfied with things inani-
mate, is easily supplied from the half of what the other
wants, and needs but a small expense for the preparation
of his food. |
. 50. They likewise say, it is requisite that he who
prepares the necessaries of life, should not afterwards
make use of philosophy as an accession; but, having
obtained it, should, with a confident mind, thus genuinely
endure* the events of the day. For we shall commit
what pertains to ourselves to a bad counsellor, if we
measure and procure what is necessary to nature, without
philosophy. Hence it is necessary that those who phi-
losophize should provide things of this kind, and strenu-
ously attend to them as much as possible. But, so far
as there is a dereliction from thence, [?.e. from philo-
sophizing|, which is not capable of effecting a perfect
purification’, so far we should not endeavour to procure
either riches or nutriment. In conjunction, therefore,
with philosophy, we should engage in things of this kind,
and be immediately persuaded that it is much better to
pursue what is the least, the most simple, and light in
nutriment. For that which is least, and is unattended
with molestation, is derived from that which is least ?.
51. The preparation also of these things, draws along

= In the original, adda wagacusvacapeavoy τὸ ϑάρρειν τὴ ψυχῇ γνησίως οὐτῶς
«ντέχεσθαι τῶν xa’ ἡμέραν. But the editor of the quarto edition of this
work, who appears to have been nothing more than a mere verbal critic,
says, in a note on this passage, that the word ἀντέχεσθαι, signifies per-
tinacissime illis inherere, nihil ultra studere; whereas it must be
obvious to any man who understands what is here said, that in this
place it signifies to endure.

Y In the original, o μη κυριευσι me τελείας ἐκθαρρησεως ; but for ἐχθαρρησέως
I read with Felicianus ἐκκαθαρσεως.

* In the original, sraxsoror yap καὶ τὸ oy drngey ax τοῦ ἐλαχίστου, But it is
obviously necessary for oxAngv to read avexAngoy, and yet this was not
perceived by the German editor of this work, Jacob Rhoer.

38 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

with it many impediments, either from the weight of the
body, [which they are adapted to increase,] or from the
difficulty of procuring them, or from their preventing the
continuity of the energy of our most principal reason-
ings*, or from some other cause. For this energy then
becomes immediately useless, and does not remain
unchanged by the concomitant perturbations. It is neces-
sary, however, that a philosopher should hope that he
may not ‘be in want of any thing through the whole of
life. But this hope will be sufficiently preserved by
things which are easily procured; while, on the other
hand, this hope is frustrated by things of a sumptuous
nature. The multitude, therefore, on this account, though
their possessions are abundant, incessantly labour to
obtain more, as if they were in want. But the recol-
lection that the greatest possible wealth has no power
worth mentioning of dissolving the perturbations of the
soul, will.cause us to be satisfied with things easily
obtained, and of the most simple nature. Things also,
which are very moderate and obvious, and which may be
procured with the greatest facility, remove the tumult
occasioned by the flesh. But the deficiency of things of
a luxurious nature will not disturb him who meditates on
death. Farther still, the pain arising from indigence
is much milder than that which is produced by repletion,
and will be considered to be so by him who does not
deceive himself with vain opinions.. Variety also of food
not only does not dissolve the perturbations of the soul,
but does not even increase the pleasure which is felt
by the flesh. For this is terminated as soon as pain is
removed”. So that the feeding on flesh does not remove
any thing which is troublesome to nature, nor effect any
thing which, unless it is accomplished, will end in pain.

2 2, 6. Of our reasonings about intelligible objects.

b Conformable to this, it is beautifully observed by Aristotle, in his
Nicomachean Ethics, that corporeal pleasures are the remedies of pain,
and that they fill up the indigence of nature, but do not perfect any
energy of the [rationad] soul.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK 1. 39

But'the pleasantness with which it is attended is violent,
and, perhaps, mingled with the contrary. For it does
not contribute to the duration of life, but to the variety
of pleasure ; and in this respect resembles venereal enjoy-
ments, and the drinking of foreign wines, without which
nature is able to remain. For those things, without
which nature cannot last, are very few, and may be pro-
cured easily, and in conjunction with justice, liberty,
quiet, and abundant leisure.

52. Again, neither does animal food contribute, but is
rather an impediment to health. For health is preserved
through those things by which it is recovered. But it is
recovered through a most slender and fleshless diet; so
that by this also it is preserved. If, however, vegetable
food does not contribute to the strength of Milo, nor, in
short, to an increase of strength, neither does a philo-
sopher require strength, or an increase of it, if he intends
to give himself up to contemplation, and not to an active
and intemperate life. But it is not at all wonderful, that
the vulgar should fancy that animal food contributes to
health; for they also think that sensual enjoyments and
venery are preservative of health, none of which benefit
any one; and those that engage in them must be thankful
if they are not injured by them. And if many are not of
this opinion, it is nothing to us. For neither is any
fidelity and constancy in friendship and benevolence to
be found among the vulgar; nor are they capable of
receiving these, nor of participating of wisdom, or any
portion of it which deserves to be mentioned. Neither
do they understand what is privately or publicly advan-
tageous; nor are they capable of forming a judgment of
depraved and elegant manners, so as to distinguish the
one from the other. And, in addition to these things,
they are full of insolence and intemperance. On this
account, there is no occasion to fear that there will not
be those who will feed on animals.

53. For if all men conceived rightly, there would be
no need of fowlers, or hunters, or fishermen, or swine-

40 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

herds. But animals governing themselves, and having
no guardian and ruler, would quickly perish, and be
destroyed by others, who would attack them and diminish
their multitude, as is found to be the case with myriads
of animals on which men do not feed. But all-various
folly incessantly dwelling with mankind, there will be an
innumerable multitude of those who will voraciously feed.
on flesh. It is necessary however to preserve health;
not by the fear of death, but for the sake of not being
impeded in the attainment of the good which is derived
from contemplation. But that which is especially pre-
servative of health, is an undisturbed state of the soul,
and a tendency of the reasoning power towards truly
existing being. For much benefit is from hence derived
to the body, as our associates have demonstrated from
experience. Hence some who have been afflicted with
the gout in the feet and hands, to such a degree as to be
infested with it for eight entire years, have expelled it
through abandoning wealth, and betaking themselves to
the contemplation of divinity’. At the same time, there-
fore, that they have abandoned riches, and a solicitude
about human concerns, they have also been liberated
from bodily disease. So that a certain state of the soul
greatly contributes both to health and‘ to the good of
the whole body, And to this also, for the most part,
a diminution of nutriment contributes. In short, as
Epicurus likewise has rightly said, that food is to be
avoided, the enjoyment of which we desire and pursue, |
but which, after we have enjoyed, we rank among things
of an unacceptable nature. But of this kind is every
thing luxuriant and gross. And in this manner those
are affected, who are vehemently desirous of such nutri-
ment, and through it are involved either in great expense,
or in disease, or repletion, or the privation of leisure‘. -

5 This is said by Porphyry, in his Life of Plotinus, to have been the
case with the senator Rogatianus.

¢ And leisure, to those who know how rightly to employ it, is, as
Socrates said, κάλλιστον κτημάτων, “ the most beautiful of possessions.”

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I, 4l

54. Hence also, in simple and slender food, repletion
is to be avoided, and every where we should consider
what will be the consequence of the possession or enjoy-
ment of it, what the magnitude of it is, and what molest-
ation of the flesh or of the soul it is capable of dis-
solving. For we ought never to act indefinitely, but in
things of this kind we should employ a boundary and
measure; and infer by a reasoning process, that he who
fears to abstain from animal food, if he suffers himself to.
feed on flesh through pleasure, is afraid of death. For
immediately, together with a privation of such food, he
‘conceives that something indefinitely dreadful will be
present, the consequence of which will be death. But
from these and similar causes, an insatiable desire is pro-
duced of riches, possessions, and renown, together with

an opinion that every good is increased with these in a
‘greater extent of time, and the dread of death as of an |
infinite evil. The pleasure however which is produced
through luxury, does not even approach to that which is
experienced by him who lives with frugality. For such a
one has great pleasure in thinking how little he requires.
For luxury, astonishment about venereal occupations, and
ambition about external concerns, being taken away, what
remaining use can there be of idle wealth, ‘which will be
of no advantage to us whatever, but will only become a
burden, no otherwise than repletion ?— while, on the
other hand, the pleasure arising from frugality is genuine
and pure. It is also necessary to accustom the body to
become alienated, as much as possible, from the pleasure
of the satiety arising from luxurious food, but not from
the fulness produced by a slender diet, in order that
moderation may proceed through all things, and that
what is necessary, or what is most excellent, may fix a
boundary to our diet. For he who thus mortifies his
body will receive every possible good, through being
sufficient to himself, and an assimilation to divinity. And
thus also, he will not desire a greater extent of time, as if
it would bring with it an augmentation of good. He will

42 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

likewise thus be truly rich, measuring wealth by a natural
bound, and not by vain opinions. Thus too, he will not
depend on the hope of the greatest pleasure, the exist-
ence of which is incredible, since this would be most
troublesome. But he will remain satisfied with his present
condition, and will net be anxious to live for a longer
period of time.

55. Besides this also, is it not absurd, that he who is
in great affliction, or is in some grievous external calamity,
or is bound with chains, does not even think of food, nor
concern himself about the means of obtaining it; but
when it is placed before him, refuses what is necessary to
his subsistence ; and that the man who is truly in bonds,
and is tormented by inward calamities, should endea-
vour to procure a variety of eatables, paying attention to
things through which he will strengthen his bonds? And
how is it possible that this should be the conduct of men
who know what they suffer, and not rather of those who
are delighted with their calamities, and who are ignorant
éf the evils which they endure? For these are affected
in a way contrary to those who are in chains, and who
are conscious of their miserable condition; since these,
experiencing no gfatification in the present life, and
being full of immense perturbation, insatiably aspire after
another life. For no one who can easily liberate himself
from all perturbations, will desire to possess silver tables
and couches, and to have ointments and cooks, splendid
vessels and garments, and suppers remarkable for their
sumptuousnegs and variety ; but such a desire arises from
a perfect uselessness to every purpose of the present life,
from an indefinite generation of good, and from immense
perturbation. Hence some do not remember the past,
the recollection of it being expelled by the present; but
others do not inquire about the present, because they al are
not gratified with existing circumstances.

56. The contemplative philosopher, however, will in-
variably adopt a slender diet. For he knows the parti-
culars in which his bond consists, so that he is not

ef

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK I. 43

capable of desiring luxuries. Hence, being delighted
with simple food, he will not seek for animal nutriment,
as if he was not satisfied with a vegetable diet. But if.
the nature of the body in a philosopher was not such as
we have supposed it to be, and was not so tractable, and
s0: adapted to have its wants satisfied through things
easily procured, and it was requisite to endure some paing
and molestations for the sake of true salvation; ought we
not [willingly] to endure them? For when it is requisité
that we should be liberated from disease, do we not
voluntarily sustain many pains, viz. while we are cut,
cavered with blood, burnt, drink bitter medicines, and
are purged through the beHy, through emeties, ‘and |
through the nostrils, and do we not also reward those
who cause us to suffer in this manner? And this being
the case, ought we not to sustain every thing, though of
the most afflictive nature, with equanimity, for the sake of
being purified from internal disease, since our contest is
for immortality, and an association with divinity, from
which we are prevented through an association with the
body? By no means, therefore, ought we to follow the .
laws of the body, which are violent and adverse to the
laws of intellect, and to the paths which lead to salvation.
Since, however, we do not now philosophize about the
endurance of pain, but about the rejection of pleasures
which are not necessary, what apology can remain for
those, who impudently endeavour to defend their own
intemperance ?

57. For if it is requisite not to dissemble any thing
through fear, but to speak freely, it is no otherwise .
possible to obtain the end [of a contemplative life], than
by adhering to God, as if fastened by a nail, being
divulsed from body, and those pleasures of the soul
which subsist through it; since our salvation is effected
by deeds, and not by a mere attention to words. But
as it is not possible with any kind of diet, and, in short,
by feeding on flesh, to become adapted to an union with
even some partial deity, much less is this possible with

(
44 ON ABSTINENCE, &c.

that God who is beyond all things, ‘and is above a nature Ὁ
simply incorporeal ; but after all-various purifications, both
of soul and body, he who is naturally of an excellent
disposition, and lives with piety and purity, will scarcely
be thought worthy to perceive him. So that, by how |
much more the Father of all things excels in simplicity,
purity, and sufficiency to himself, as being established
far beyond all material representation, by so much the
more is it requisite, that he who approaches to him
should be in every respect pure and holy, beginning from
his body, and ending internally, and distributing to each
of the parts, and in short to every thing which is present
with him, a purity adapted to the nature of each. Per-
haps, however, these things will not be contradicted by
any one. But it may be doubted, why we admit absti-
nence from animal food to pertain to purity, though in
sacrifices we slay sheep and oxen, and conceive that
these immolations are pure and acceptable to the Gods.
Hence, since the solution of this requires a long discus-
sion, the consideration of sacrifices must be assumed
from another principle.

ΟΝ

ABSTINENCE FROM ANIMAL FOOD.

BOOK THE SECOND.

a ee

1. Pursuine therefore the inquiries pertaining to sim-
plicity and purity of diet, we have now arrived, O Cas-
tricius, at the discussion of sacrifices ; the consideration
of which is difficult, and at the same time requires much
explanation, if we intend to decide concerning it in such
ἃ way as will be acceptable to the Gods. Hence, as this
is the proper place for such a discussion, we shall now
unfold what appears to us to be the truth on this subject,
and what is capable of being narrated, correcting what
was overlooked in the hypothesis proposed from the
beginning.

2. In the first place therefore we say, it does not
follow because animals are slain that it is necessary to eat
them. Nor does he who admits the one, I mean that they
should be slain, entirely prove that they should be eaten.
For the laws permit us to defend ourselves against
‘enemies who attack us [by killing them]; but it did not
seem proper to these laws to grant that we should eat
thém, as being a thing contrary to the nature of man. In
the second place, it does not follow, that because it is
proper to sacrifice certain animals to demons, or Gods,
or certain powers, through causes either known or un-
known to men, it is therefore necessary to feed on
animals. For it may be shown, that men assumed
animals in sacrifices, which no one even of those who

48 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

introduced, we do not rightly interpret; since we call the
worship of the Gods through the immolation of animals
Suoia, thusta. But so careful were the ancients not to
transgress this custom, that against those who, neglecting
the pristine, introduced novel modes of sacrificing, they
employed execrations®, and therefore they now denominate
the substances which are used for fumigations ἀρωματα,
aromata, 1. 6. aromatics, [or things of an execrable nature. ]
The antiquity, however, of the before-mentioned fumiga-
tions may be perceived by him who considers that many
now also sacrifice certain portions of odoriferous wood.
Hence, when after grass, the earth produced trees, and
men at first fed on the fruits of the oak, they offered to
the Gods but few of the fruits on account of their rarity,
but in sacrifices they burnt many of its leaves. After
this, however, when human life proceeded to a.milder
nutriment, and sacrifices from nuts were introduced, they
said enough of the oak.

6. But as barley first appeared after leguminous sub-
stances, the race of men used it in primitive sacrifices,
moistening it for this purpose with water. Afterwards,
when they had broken and bruised it, so as to render
it eatable, as the instruments of this operation afforded a
divine assistance to human life, they concealed them in
an arcane place, and approached them as things of a
sacred nature. But esteeming the food produced from
it when bruised to be blessed, when compared with their
former nutriment, they offered, in fine, the first-fruits of
it to the Gods. Hence also now, at the end of the sacri-
fices, we use fruits that are bruised. or ground; testi-
fying by this how much fumigations have departed from
their ancient simplicity; at the same time not perceiving
on what account we perform each of these. Proceeding,
however, from hence, and being more abundantly sup-

> In the original αρασαμένους, which is derived from the verb agaouas,
imprecor, maledico ; and from hence, according to Porphyry, came the
word agapara,

\

ANIMAL .FOOD.—BOOK II. 49

plied, -both with other fruits and wheat, the first-fruits of
cakes, made of the fine flour of wheat, and of every
thing else, were offered in sacrifices to the Gods; many
flowers being collected for this purpose, and with these
all that was conceived to be beautiful, and adapted, by
its odour, to a divine sense, being mingled. From these,
also, some were used for garlands, and others were given
to the fire. But when they had discovered the use of
the divine drops of wine, and honey, and likewise of oil,
for the purposes of human life, then they sacrificed these.
to their causes, the Gods. 7
7. And these things appear to ‘be testified by the
splendid procession in honour of the Sun and the Hours,
which is even now performed at Athens, and in which
there were other herbs besides grass, and also acorns, the
fruit of the crab tree, barley, wheat, a heap of dried figs,
cakes made of wheaten and barley flour; and, in the
᾿ Yast place, an earthen pot. This mode, however, of offer-
ing first-fruits in sacrifices, having, at length, proceeded
to great illegality, the assumption of immolations, most
dire and full of cruelty, was introduced ; so that it would
seem that the execrations which were formerly uttered
against us, have now received their consummation, in
consequence of men slaughtering animals, and defiling
altars with blood; and this commenced from that period
in which mankind tasted of blood, through having expe-
rienced the evils of famine and war. Divinity, therefore,
as Theophrastus says, being indignant, appears to have
inflicted a punishment adapted to the crime. Hence
some men became atheists; but others, in consequence
of forming erroneous conceptions of a divine nature, may
‘be more justly called καποῴρονες, kukophrones, than κακοθέοι,
kakotheot*, because they think that the Gods are de-_
praved, and in no respect naturally more excellent than
we are. ‘Thus, therefore, some were seen to live without

< i.e, May be rather called malevolent than unhappy.
5 .

δ᾽ ΟΝ. ABSTINENCE FROM

sacrificing any thing, and without offering the firdt-fruits
of their possessions to the Gods; but others sacrificed
improperly, and made use of illegal oblations.

8. Hence the Thoes*, who dwell in the confines of
Thrace, as they neither offered any first-fruits, nor sacri
ficed to the Gods, were at that time suddenly taken away
from the rest of mankind; so that neither the inha+
bitants, aor the city, nor the foundations of the houses,
, could by any one be found.

‘* Men prone to ill, denied the Gods their due,
And by their follies made their days but few.
The altars of the bless’d neglected stand,
Without the offerings which the laws demand
But angry Jove in dust this people laid,
Because no henours to the Gods they paid.”
Hesrop. Op. et Di. lib. i, v. 188.

Nor did they offer first-fruits to the Gods, as it was just
that they should. But with respect to the Bassarians,
who formerly were not only emulous of sacrificing bulls,
but also ate the flesh of slaughtered men, m the same
manner as we now do with other animals; for we offer
to the Gods some parts of them as first-fruits, and eat the
rest;— with respect to these men, who' has not heard,
that insanely rushing on and biting each. other, and in
reality feeding on blood, they did not cease to act in this
manner till the whole race was destroyed of those whe
used sacrifices of this kind ?

9. The sacrifice, therefore, through animals is pos-
terior and most recent, and originated from a cause
which is not of a pleasing nature, like that of the sacri-
fice from fruits, but received its commencement either
from famine, or some other unfortunate circumstance.
The causes, indeed, of the peculiar mactations among the

ἃ Fabricius is of opinion that these Thoes are the same with the
Acrothoitz, mentioned by Simplicius in his.Comment in Epictet. from _
Theophrastus.

ANIMAL FOOD.—800XK II. δῚ

Athenians,-had their beginning either in ignorance, or

anger, or fear. For the slaughter of swine is attributed to

an involuntary error of Clymene, who, by unintentionally

striking, slew the animal. Hence her husband, being

terrified as if he had perpetrated an illegal deed, con-

sulted the oracle of the Pythian God about it. But as

the God did not condemn what had happened, the

slaughter of animals was afterwards considered as a thing

‘of an indifferent nature. The inspector, however, of '
sacred rites, who was the offspring of prophets, wishing

to make an offering of first-fruits from sheep, was pers
mitted to do so, it is said, by an oracle, but with much

caution and fear. For the oracle was as follows : —

‘* Offspring of prophets, sheep by force to slay,
The Gods permit not thee; but with wash’d hands
For thee ’tis lawful any sheep to kill,
That dies a voluntary death.”

10. But a goat was first slain in Icarus, a mountain of
Attiea, because it had cropped a vine. And Diomus,
who was a priest of Jupiter Polieus, was the first that
slew an ox; because, when the festival sacred to Jupiter,
and called Diipolia, was celebrated, and fruits were pre-
pared after the ancient manner, an ox approaching tasted
the sacred cake. But the priest, being aided by othera
who were present, slew the ox. And these are the
' causes, indeed, which are assigned by the Athenians for
this deed; but by others, other causes are narrated. All
of them, however, are full of explanations that are not
holy. But most of them assign famine, and the injustice
with which it is attended, as the cause. Hence men
having tasted of animals, they offered them in sacrifice,
as first-fruits, to the Gods; but prior to this, they were
accustomed to abstain from animal food. Whence, since
the sacrifice of animals is not more ancient than neces-
sary food, it may be determined from this circumstance
whet ought to be the nutriment of men. But it does not
follow, because men have tasted of and offered animals in -

52 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

sacrifices as firet-fruits, that it must necessarily be ad-
mitted to be pious to eat that which was not piously
offered to the Gods.

11. But what especially proves that every thing of
this kind originated from injustice, is this, that the same
things are neither sacrificed nor eaten in every nation,
but that they conjecture what it is fit for them to do
from what they find to be useful to themselves. With
the Egyptians, therefore, and Phoenicians, any one would
sooner taste human flesh than the flesh of a cow. The
cause, however, is, that this animal being useful, is also
rare among them. Hence, though they eat bulls, and
offer them ‘in sacrifice as first-fruits, yet they spare cows
for the sake of their progeny, and ordain that, if any one
kill them, it shall be considered as an expiation. And
thus, for the sake of utility in one and ‘the same genus of
animals, they distinguish what is pious, and what is
impious. So that these particulars subsisting after this
manner, Theophrastus reasonably forbids those to sacri-
fice animals who wish to be truly pious; employing
these, and other similar arguments, such as the fol-
lowing.

12. In the first place, indeed, because we sacrificed
animals through the occurrence, as we have said, of
a greater necessity. For pestilence and war were the
causes that introduced the necessity of eating them.
Since, therefore, we are supplied with fruits, what occa-
sion is there to use the sacrifice of necessity? In the
next place, the remunerations of, and thanks for benefits,
are to be given differently, to different persons, according
to the worth of the benefit conferred ; so that the greatest
remunerations, and from things of the most honourable
nature, are to be given to those who have benefited us
in the greatest degree, and especially if they are the
causes of these gifts. But the most beautiful and: honour-
able of those things, by which the Gods benefit us, are
the fruits of the earth. For through these they preserve

eus, and enable.us to live legitimately; so that, from

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 53

these we ought to venerate them. Besides, it is requisite
to sacrifice those things by the sacrifice of which we
shall not injure any one. For nothing ought to be so
innoxious to all things as sacrifice. But if some one
should say, that God gave animals for our use, no less.
than the fruits of the earth, yet it does not follow that.
they are, therefore, to be sacrificed, because in so doing
they are injured, through being deprived of life. For.
sacrifice is, as the name implies, something foly*. But:
no one is holy who requites a benefit from things which
are the property of another, whether he takes fruits or
‘plants from one who is unwilling to be deprived of them..
For how can this be holy, when those are injured from.
whom they are taken? If, however, he who takes away:
fruits from others does not sacrifice with sanctity, it
cannot be holy to sacrifice things taken from others,
which are in every respect more honourable than the
fruits of the earth. For a more dire deed is thus perpe-.
trated. But soul is much more honourable than the
vegetable productions of the earth, which it is not fit,
by sacrificing animals, that we should take away. . |

13. Some one, however, perhaps may say, that we
also take away something from plants. [when we eat, and
sacrifice them to the Gods]. But the ablation is not.
similar; since we.do not take this away from those who
are unwilling that we should.. For, if we omitted to
gather them, they would spontaneously drop their fruits..
The gathering of the fruits, also, is not attended with the.
destruction of the plants, as it is when animals lose their.
animating principle. And, with respect to the fruit
which we receive from bees, since this is obtained by our.
labour, it is fit that we should derive a common benefit.
from it. For bees collect their honey from plants; but
we carefully attend to them. On which account it is.
requisite that such a division.should be made [of our
attention and their labour] that they may suffer no injury.

- © Inthe original, » yag θυσία, ὁσια τις στιν κατὰ roves.

-

~

84 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

But that which is useless to them, and beneficial to us,
will be the reward which we receive from them [of our
attention to their concerns]. In sacrifices, theréfore, we
should abstain from animals. For, though all things
are in reality the property of the Gods, yet plants appear
to be our property; since we sow and cultivate them,
and nourish them by other attentions which we pay to
them. We ought to sacrifice, therefore, from out own
property, and not from the property of others ; since that
which may be procured at a small expense, and which
may easily be obtained, is more holy, mote acceptable to
the Gods, and better adapted to the purposes of sactifice,
and to the exercise of continual piety. Hence, that
᾿ς which is neither holy, nor to be obtained at ἃ small
expense, is not to be offered in sacrifice, even though it
should be present.

14, But that animals do nét rank athong things which
may be procured: easily, and at ἃ small expense, may be
seen by directing our view to the preater part of oar
- pace: for we are not now ὁ consider that séme men
_ abound in sheep, and others i oxen. In the first place,
therefore, there are many nations that do not possess any
of those animals which are offered m sacrifice, some
ignoble animals, perhaps, excepted. And, in the second
place, most of those that dwell in cities themselves,
possess these but rarely. But if some one should say
that the inhabitants of cities have not mild fruits in
abundance; yet, though this should be admitted, they
are not in want of the other vegetable productions of the
earth; nor 15 it so difficult to procure fruits as it is to
procure animals. Hence an abundance of fruits, and
other vegetables, is more easily obfained than that of
anizaals. But that which is obtained with facility, and at
a small expense, contributes to incessant and universal
diety.

15. Experience also testifies that the Gods rejoice in
this more than in sumptuous offerings. For when that
Thessalian sacrificed to the Pythian deity oxen with gilt

ANIMAL FOQOD.——BOOK II. | 68

horns, and heoatombs, Apollo said, that the offering
of Hermigneus was more pratifying to him, though he
had only sacrificed as much meal as he could take with
hie three fingers out of a sack. But when the Thessglian,
on hearing this, placed all the rest of his offerings on the
altar, the God again said, that by sq doing his present
was doubly more unacceptable to him than his former
offering. Hence the sacrifice which is attended with 8
small expense is pleasing to the Gods, and divinity Jookg
more to the disposition and manners of those that sgcti- ©
fice, than to the multitude of the things which are,
sacrificed.

10. Theopompus likewise narrates things similar to
these, viz. that a certain Megnesian came from Asia
to Delphi; a man very rich, and abounding ig cattle, and
that he was accustomed every year to make many and

magnificent sacrifices to the Gods, partly through the

ebundance of his possessions, and partly through pjety
and wishing to please the Gods, But being thus dig-
posed, he came to the divinity at Delphi, bringing with
him ἃ hecatomb for the God, and magnificently honouring
Apollo, he consulted his oracle. Conceiving also that he
worshipped the Gods in a manner more beautifal thaa
that of all other men, he asked the Pythian deity who the |
soan was that, with the greatest promptitude, and in the

dest manner, venerated divinity, and made the most
acceptable sacrifices, conceiving that on this ocrasion the
God would deem him to be pre-eminent. The Pythien
deity however answered, that Clearchus, whe dwelt in
“Methydrium, a town of Arcadia, worshipped the Gods ig
@ way surpassing that of all.other men. But the Magne-
sian being astonished, was desirous of seeing ‘Clearghus,
and of learning from him the manner in which he per-
formed his sacrifices. Swiftly, therefore, betaking him-
self to Methydrium, in the first place, indeed, he despised
the smailness and vileness of the town, conceiving that
neither any private person, nor even the whole city, could

δ6 ; ON ABSTINENCE FROM:

honour the Gods more magnificently and more beauti-
fully than he did. Meeting, however, with the man, he
thought fit to ask him after what manner he reverenced
the Gods. But Clearchus answered him, that he dili-
gently sacrificed to them at proper times in every month
at the new moon, crowning and adorning the statues of
Hermes and Hecate, and the other sacred images which
were left to us by our ancestors, and that he also honoured
the Gods with frankincense, and sacred wafers and
cakes. He likewise said, that he performed public sacri-
fices annually, omitting no festive day; and that in these
festivals he worshipped the Gods, not by slaying oxen,
nor by cutting victims into fragments,. but that he sacri-
ficed whatever he might casually meet with, sedulously
offering the first-fruits to the Gods of all the vegetable
productions of the seasons, and of all the fruits with
which he was supplied. He added, that some of these he
placed before the [statues of the] Gods‘, but that. he
burnt-others on their altars; and that, being studious of
frugality, he avoided the sacrificing of oxen.

17, By some writers, also, it is related, that certain
tyrants, after the Carthaginians were conquered, having,
with great strife among themselves, placed hetacombs ~
before Apollo, afterwards inquired of the God with
which of the offerings he was most delighted ; and that he
answered, contrary to all their expectation, that he was.
most pleased with the cakes of Docimus. But. this
Docimus was an inhabitant of Delphi, and cultivated
some rugged and stony land. Docimus, therefore, com-
ing on that day from.the place which he cultivated, took
‘from a bag which was fastened round him a few handfuls
of meal, and sacrificed them to the God, who was more
delighted with his offering than with the magnificent.

~~

€ In the original, xa: τὰ μὲν παρατιθεναι, which Felicianus very errone-
ously renders, * ulius siquidem mihi ad vescendem sunio ;” but Valen-
tinus rightly, “ et horum aliqua coram illis apponere.”

ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK II. 57

+ sacrifices of the tyrants. Hence, also, a certain poet,
because the affair was known, appears to have asserted
things of a similar kind, as we are informed by Antiphanes
in his Mystics:

In simple offerings most the Gods delight :
For though before them hecatombs are placed,

Yet frankincense is burnt the last of all.

An indication this that all the rest,

Preceding, was a vain expense, bestowed

Through ostentation, for the sake of men ; .

But a small offering gratifies the Gods.

Menander likewise, in the comedy called the Morose,
says, :
Pious th’ oblation which with frankincense
And popanum® is made ; for in the fire
Both these, when placed, divinity accepts.

18. On this account also, earthen, wooden, and wicker
vessels were formerly used, and especially in public sacri-
fices, the ancients being persuaded that divinity is de-
lighted with things of this kind. Whence,.even now, the
most ancient vessels, and which are made of wood,
are thought to be more divine, both on account of the
matter and the simplicity of the art by which they were
fashioned. It is said, therefore, that AXschylus, on his .
brother’s asking him to write a Pean in honour of
Apollo, replied, that the. best Pan was written by Tynni-
chus"; and that if his composition were to be compared
with that of Tynnichus, the same thing would take place
as if new were compared with ancient statues. For
the latter, though they are simple in their formation, are
conceived to be divine; but the former, though they are
most accurately elaborated, produce indeed admiration,
but are not believed to possess so much of a divine

ΕΑ round, broad, and thin cake, which was offered in sacrifice
to the Guds.

* Tynnichus, thc Chalcidensian, is mentioned by Plato in his Io.

58 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

nature. Hence Hesiod, praising the law of ancient saeri- .
fices, very properly says,
Your country’s rites in sacrifice observe :

[In pious works] the ancient law is best!.

19. But those who have written concerning sacred
operations and sacrifices, admonish us to be accurate
in preserving what pertains to the popana, because these
are more acceptable to the Gods than the sacrifice

‘which is performed through the mactation of animals.
Sophocles also, in describing a sacrifice which is pleasing
to divinity, says in his Polyidus:

The skins of sheep in sacrifice were used, _
Libations too of wine, grapes well preserved,
And fruits collected in a heap of every kind ;
The olive’s pinguid juice, and waxen work
Most variegated, of the yellow bee.

Formerly, also, there were venerable monuments in
Delos of those who came from the Hyperboreans, bearing
handfuls fof fruits]. It is necessary, therefore, that, being
purified in our manners, we should make oblations, offer-

‘ing to the Gods those sacrifices which are pleasing te
them, and not such as are attended with great expense.
Now, however, if a man’s body is not pure and invested
with a splendid garment, he does not think it 1s qualified
for the sanctity of sacrifice. But when he has rendered
his body splendid, together with his garment, though
his soul at the same time is not purified from vice, yet he
betakes himself to sacrifice, and thinks that it is a thing
of no consequence; as if divinity did not especially
rejoice in that which is most. divine in our nature, when
it is in a pure condition, as being allied to his essence.
In Epidaurus, therefore, there was the following inscrip-
tion on the doors of the temple:

Into an odorous temple, he who goes

Should pure and holy be ; but to be wise
In what to sanctity pertains, ἰδ to be pure.

! Vid. Hesiod. Fragm. v. 169.

ANIMAL FOOD.+—-BOOK II. 59

20. But that God 15 not delighted with the amplitude
’ of sacrifices, but with any casual offering, is evident from
this, that of our daily food, whatever it may be that
is placed before us, we all of us make an offering to the
Gods, before we have tasted it ourselves; this offering
being ‘small indeed, but the greatest testimony of honour
to divinity. Moreover, Theophrastus shows, by enume-
rating many of the rites of different countries, that the
sacrifices of the ancients were from fruite, and he narrates
what pertains to libations in the following manner: “ An-
cient sacrifices were for the most part performed with
sobriety. But those sacrifices are sober in which the
libations are made with water. Afterwards, however,
libations were made with honey. For we first receive
this liquid fruit prepared for us by the bees. In the
third place, libations were made with oil; and in the
fourth and last place with wine.”

21. These things, however, are testified not only by
the pillars which are preserved in Cyrbe*, and which con- .
tain, as it were, certain true descriptions of the Cretan
sacred rites of the Corybantes ; but also by Empedocles,
who, in discussing what pertains to sacrifices and theo-
gony, or the generation of the Gods, says:

With them nor Mars nor tumult dire was found,
Nor Saturn, Neptune, or the sovereign Jove, |
But Venus [beauty’s] queen.
And Venus is friendship. Afterwards he adds,
With painted animals, and statues once
Of sacred form, with unguents sweet of smell,
The fume of frankincense and genuine myrrh,
And with libations poured upon the ground
Of yellow honey, Venus was propitious made.

Which ancient custom is still even now preserved by
some persons as a certain vestige of the truth. And in
the last place, Empedocles says,

Nor then were altars wet with blood of bulls
Irrationally slain. .

k A city of Crete.

id

600 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

22. For, as it appears to me, when friendship and a
proper sense of the duties’ pertaining to kindred natures,
was possessed by all men, no o1e slaughtered any living
being, in consequence of thinking that other animals
were allied to him. But when strife and tumult, every
kind of contention, and the principle of war, invaded
mankind, then, for the first time, no one in reality spared
any one of his kindred natures. The following parti-
culars, likewise, ought to be considered: For, as though ἢ
there is an affinity between us and noxious men, who,
as it were, by a certain impetus of their own nature and
depravity, are incited to injure any one they may happen
to meet, yet we think it requisite that all of them should
be punished and destroyed; thus also, with respect to
those irrational animals that are naturally malefic and
unjust, and who are impelled to injure those that approach
them, it is perhaps fit that they should be destroyed. But
with respect to other animals who do not at all act
unjustly, and are not naturally impelled to injure us, it is
certainly unjust to destroy and murder them, no otherwise
than it would be to slay men who are not iniquitous. |
And this seems to evince, that the justice between us
and other animals does not arise from some of them
being naturally noxious and malefic, but others not, as is
also the case with respect to men.

23. Are therefore those animals to be sacrificed to the
Gods which are thought to be deserving of death? But
how can this be possible, if they are naturally depraved ?
For it is no more proper to sacrifice such as these, than it
would be to sacrifice mutilated animals. For thus,
indeed, we shall offer the first-fruits of things of an evil
nature, but we shall not sacrifice for the sake of honour-
ing the Gods. Hence, if animals are to be sacrificed
to the Gods, we. should sacrifice those that are perfectly
innoxious. It is however acknowledged,. that those
animals are not to be destroyed who do not at all injure
us, 80 that neither are they to be sacrificed to the Gods.
If, therefore, neither these, nor those that are noxious,

ANIMAL FOOD.— ΒΟΟΚ II. ' 6}

are to be sacrificed, is it not evident that we should
abstain from them more than from any thing else, and
that we should not sacrifice any one of them, though it is
fit that some of them should be destroyed ?

24. To which may be added, that we should sacrifice
to the Gods for the sake of three things, viz. either for
the sake of honouring them, or of testifying our grati-
tude, or through our want of good. For, as we offer first-
fruits to good men, thus also we think it is necessary that
we should offer them to the Gods. But we honour
the Gods, either exploring the means of averting evils
and obtaining good, or when we have been previously
benefited, or in order that we may obtain some present
advantage and assistance, or merely for the purpose of
venerating the goodness of their nature. So that if the -
first-fruits of animals are to be offered to the Gods, some
of them for the sake of this are to be sacrificed. For
whatever we sacrifice, we sacrifice for the sake of some
one of the. above-mentioned particulars. Is it therefore
to be thought that Ged is honoured by us, when we are
directly seen to act unjustly through the first-fruits which
we offer to him? Or will he not rather think that he
is dishonoured by such a sacrifice, in which, by imimo-
lating animals that have not at all injured us, we acknow-
ledge that we have acted unjustly. So that no one of
other animals is to be sacrificed for the sake of honouring
divinity. Nor yet are they to be sacrificed for tle pur-
pose of testifying our gratitude to the Gods. For he who
makes a just retribution for the benefits he has received,
ought not to make it by doing an injury to certain other
animals. For he will no more appear to make a retribu-
tion than he who, plundering his neighbour of his pro-
perty, should bestow it on another person for the sake of
honour. Neither are animals to be sacrificed for the sake
of obtaining a certain good of which we are in want. For
he who endeavours to be benefited by acting. unjustly, is
to be suspected as one who would not be grateful even
'-when he is benefited.. So that animals are not to be

62 ΟΝ ABSTINENCE FROM

sacrificed to the Gods through the expectation of deriving
advantage from the sacrifice. For he who does this, may
perhaps elude men, but it is impossible that he can elude
divinity. If, therefore, we ought to sacrifice for the
sake of a certain thing, but this is not to be done for the
sake of any of the before mentioned particulars, it is evi-
dent that animals ought not to be sacrificed.

26. For, by endeavouring to obliterate the truth of
these things through the pleasures which we derive from
sacrifices, we deceive ourselves, but cannot deceive divi-
nity. Of those animals, therefore, which are of an
ignoble nature, which do not impart to our life any supe-
rior utility, and which do not afford us any pleasure, we
do not sacrifice. any one to the Gods. For who. ever
sacrificed serpents, scorpions, and apes, or any one of
such like animals? But we do not abstain from any one
of those animals which afford a certain utility to our life,
or which have something in them that contributes to out
enjoyments; since we, in reality, cut their throats, and
excoriate them, under the patronage of divinity’. For we
sacrifice to the Gods oxen and sheep, and besides these;
stags and birds, and fat hogs, though they do not at
all participate of purity, but afford us delight. And of
these animals, indeed, some, by co-operating with our
labours, afford assistance to our life, but others supply us
with food, or administer to our other wants. But those
which effect neither of these, yet, through the enjoyment
which is derived from them, are slain by men in saerifices
similarly with these who afford us utility. We do not,
however, sacrifice asses or elephants, or any other of
those animals that co-operate with us in our labours, but
are not subservient to our pleasure; though, sacrificmg
‘being excepted, we do not abstain from such like animals,
but we cut their throats on account of the delight with
which the deglutition of them is attended; and of those
which are fit to be sacrificed, we do not sacrifice such

| j..2. Under the pretext of being patronized by divinity in 90-doing. ὁ

!

ANIMAL FOOD.~—BOOK 11.᾿ 63

as are acceptable to the Gods, but such as in a greater
degree gratify the desires of men ; thus testifying against
ourselves, that we persist in sacrificing to the Gods, for
the sake of our own pleasure, and not for the sake of gra-
tifying the Gods.

26. But of the Syrians, the Jews indeed, through the
sacrifice which they first made, even now, says Theo-
phrastus, sacrifice animals, and if we were persuaded by ©
them to sacrifice ia the same way that they do, we should
abstain from the deed. For they do not feast on the
flesh of the sacrificed animals, but having thrown the
whole of the victims into the fire, and poured much honey
and wine on them dunng the night, they swiftly consume
the sacrifice, in order that the all-seeing sun may not
become a spectator of it. And they do this, fasting
duriag all the intermediate days, and through the whole
of this time, as belonging to the class of philosophers,
and also discourse with each other about the divinity™.
But in the night, they apply themselves to the theory of
the stars, surveying them, and through prayers invoking
God. For these make offerings both of other ammals
and themselves, domg this from necessity, and not from
their own will. The truth of this, however, may be
dearnt by any one who directs his attention to the Egyp-
tians, the most learned of all men; who are so far froxe
slaying other animals, that they make the mages of these
᾿ to be imitations of the Gods; so adapted and allied do
they conceive these to be both te Gods and men.

27. For at first, indeed, sacrifices of fruits were made
to the Gods; but, in the course of time, men becoming
negligent of sanctity, in consequence of fruits being
scarce, and, through the want of legitimate nutriment,
being impelled to eat each other; then supplicating
divinity with many prayers, they first began to make
oblations of themselves to the Gods, not only conse-

™ Porphyry, in what he here says of the Jews, alludes to that sect

of them called Esszans; concerning whom, see the 4th book of
this work,

64 ON ABSTINENCE FROM .

crating to the divinities whatever among their possessions
was most beautiful, but, proceeding beyond this, they
sacrificed those of their own species. Hence, even to the
present time, not only in Arcadia, in the Lupercal festi-
vals, and in Carthage, men are sacrificed in. common to
Saturn, but periodically, also, for the sake of remem-
bering the legal institute, they sprinkle the altars of those
of the same tribe with blood, although the rites of their
sacrifices exclude, by the voice of the crier, him from
engaging in them who is accused of human slaughter.
Proceeding therefore from hence, they made the bodies
of other animals supply the place of their own in sacri-
fices, and again, through a satiety of legitimate ‘nutri-
. ment, becoming oblivious of piety, they were induced by
voracity to leave nothing untasted, nothing undevoured.
And this is what now happens to all men with respect to
the aliment from fruits. For when, by the assumption of
them, they have alleviated their necessary indigence,
then searching for a superfluity of satiety, they labour to
procure many things for food which are placed beyond
the limits of temperance. Hence, as if they had made no
ignoble sacrifices to the Gods, they proceeded also to
taste the animals which they immolated; and from this,
as a principle of the deed, the eating of animals became
an addition to men to the nutriment derived from fruits.
As, therefore, antiquity offered the'first produce of fruits _
to the Gods, and gladly, after their pious sacrifice, tasted
what they offered, thus also, when they sacrificed the
firstlings of animals to the divinities, they thought that
the same thing ought to be done by them, though ancient
piety did not ordain these particulars after this manner,
but venerated each of the Gods from fruits. For with such
oblations, both nature, and every sense of the humgn soul,
are delighted. ©

No altar ther was wet with blood of bulls
Irrationally slain ; but this was thought
To be of every impious deed thé worst,
Limbs to devour of brutes deprived of life.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 69

28. The truth of this may also be perceived from the
altar which is even now preserved about Delos, which,
because no animal is brought to, or is sacrificed upon it,
is called the altar of the pious. So that the inhabitants
not only abstain from sacrificing animals, but they like-
wise conceive, that those who established, are similarly
pious with those who use the altar. Hence, the Pytha-
goreans having adopted this mode of sacrifice, abstained
from animal food through the whole of life. But when
they distributed to the Gods a certain animal instead
of themselves, they merely tasted of it, living in reality
without touching other animals. We, however, do not
act after this manner ; but being filled with animal diet,
we have arrived at this manifold illegality in our life
by slaughtering animals, and using them for food. For
neither is it proper that the altars of the Gods should be
defiled with murder, nor that food of this kind should be
touched by men, as neither is it fit that men should S
eat one another; but the precept which is still preserved
at Athens, should be obeyed through the whole of life. _

29. For formerly, as we have before observed, when
men sacrificed to the Gods fruits and not animals, and did
not assume the latter for food, it is said, that a common
sacrifice being celebrated at Athens, one Diomus, or
᾿ Sopater, who was ‘not a native, but cultivated some land
in Attica, seizing a sharp axe which was near to him, and
being excessively indignant, struck with it an ox, who,
coming from his labour, approached to a table, on which
were openly placed cakes and other offerings which were
to be burnt as a sacrifice to the Gods, and ate some, but
trampled on the rest of the offerings. The ox, therefore,
being killed, Diomus, whose anger was now appeased, at
the same time perceived what kind of deed he had perpe-
trated. And the ox, indeed, he buried. But embracing
a. voluntary banishment, as if he had been accused of
impiety, he fled to Crete. A great dryness, however,
taking place in the Attic land from vehement heat, and a
dreadful sterility of fruit, and the Pythian deity being in

δ. ON ABSTINENCE FROM.

consequence of it consulted by the general consent, the
God answered, that the Cretan exile must expiate the
crime; and that, if the murderer was punished, and the
statue of the slain ox was erected in the place in which it
. fell, this would be beneficial both to those.who had and
those who had not tasted its flesh. An inquiry thereforé
being made into the affair, and Sopater, together with
the deed, having been discovered, he, thinking that he
should be liberated from the difficulty in which he was
now involved, through the accusation of impiety, if the
same thing was done ,by all men in common, said te
those who came to-him, that it was necessary an ox
should be slain by the city. But, on their being dubious
who should strike the ox, he said that he would under
take to do it, if they would make him a citizen, and
would be partakers with him of the slaughter. This,
therefore, being granted, they returned to the city, and
‘ordered the deed to be accomplished in such a way as
it is performed by them at present, [and which was as
follows :]

30. They selected virgins who were drawers of water ;
but these brought water for the purpose of sharpening an
axe and a knife. And these being sharpened, one person
gave the axe, another struck with it ‘the ox, and a third
person cut the throat of the ox. But after this, havin
excofiated the animal, all that were present ate of its
flesh. These things therefore being performed, they
sewed up the hide of the ox, and having stuffed it with
straw, raised it upright in the same form which it had
when alive, and yoked it to a plough, as if it was about
to work with it. Instituting also a judicial. process,
respecting the slaughter of the ox, they cited ‘all those
who were partakers of the deed, to defend their conduct.
But as the drawers of watef accused those who sharpened
the axe and the knife, ‘as more culpable than themselves,
and ‘those who sharpened these instruments accused him
‘who gave the axe, and he accused him who cut the throat
ofthe ox, and this last person accused the knife, — hence,

ANIMAL -FOOD.—BOOE HI. 6?
as the κα΄ could ndt speak, they condemned it as the
cuuse of the slaughter. From that time also, even till
now, during the festival sacred to Jupiter, in the Acro-
polis, at Athens, the sacrifice of an ox is performed after
the same manner. For, placing cakes on a brazen table,
they drive oxen round it, and the ox that tastes of the
cakes that are distributed on the table, is: slain. The
race likewise of those who perform this, still remains.
And all those, indeed, who derive their origin from
Sopater are called boutupoi [i. e. slayers of oxen) ; but
those who are descended from him that drove the ox
round the table, are called kentriadai, [or .stimulators.]
And those who originate from him that cut the throat
of the ox, are denominated daitroi, [or dividers,] on ac-
count of the banquet which takes ‘place from the distri-
bution of flesh. ‘ But when they have filled the hide, and
the judicial process is ended, they throw the knife into
the sea.

31. Hence, neither did the ancients conceive it to be
holy to slay animals that co-operated with us in works
beneficial to our life, and we should avoid doing this even
now. And as formerly it was not pious for men to injure
these animals, so now it should be considered as unholy
to slay them for the sake of food. If, however, this is to
be done from motives of religious reverence of the Gods,
yet every passion or affection which is essentially pro-
duced from bodies is to be rejected, in order that we may
not procure food from improper substances, and thus
have an incentive to violence as the intimate associate
of our life. “For by such a rejection we shall, at least, all
of us derive great benefit in what pertains to our mutual
security, if we do not in any thing else. For those whose
sense is averse to the destruction of animals of a species
different from their own, will evidently abstain from in--
juring those of their own kind. Hence it. would perhaps
have been best, if men in after-times had immediately.
abstained from slaughtering these animals; but since no-
one ts free from error, it remains fon posterity. to take:

68 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

away by purifications the crime of their ancestors, Te

᾿ specting nutriment. This, however, will be effected, if,
placing before our eyes the dire nature of such conduct,

we exclaim with Empedocles : υ

Ah me, while yet exempt from such a crime,
Why was I not destroyed by crael Time,
Before these lips began the guilty deed,

On the dire nutriment of flesh to feed?

For in those only the appropriate sense sympathetically
grieves for errors that have been committed, who endee- -
your to find a remedy for the evils with which they are
afflicted; so that every one, by offering pure and holy
sacrifices to divinity, may through sanctity obtain the
greatest benefits from the Gods.

32. But the benefit derived from fruits is the first and
the greatest of all others, and which, a8 soon as they are
matured, should alone be offered to the Gods, and to
Earth, by whom they are produced. For she is the -
common Vesta of Gods and men; and it is requisite that
all of us, reclining on her surface, as on the bosom of our
mother and nurse, should celebrate her divinity, and love
her with a parental affection, as the source of our exist-
ence. For thus, when we exchange this life for another,
we shall again be thought worthy of a residerice in the
heavens, and of associating with all the celestial Gods,
whom, now beholding*, we ought to venerate with those
fruits of which they are the causes, sacrificing indeed to

" In the original, οὖς νυν ogdvrac τιμᾶν τούτους, at, instead of which,
_Reisk proposes to read, ove τὸν ovy ορωνγτας τιμαν δὲ, [vel Xn] roves, n7.A,
But “the insertion of wy is most absurd: for the celestial are called
the visible Gods. Thus Plato, in the Timeus, in the speech of the
Demiurgus to the junior or mundane Gods, who consist of the celestial
and sublunary deities, calls the celestial Gods those that visibly revolve,
and the sublunary, those that become apparent when they please;
Ewe: οὖν warric ὁσοι τὰ wipwohoves φανέρως, καὶ ores φαίνονται nad’ orev ay ἔϑελωσε"
Seo, γενεσιν ἔσχον, x... Conformably, therefore, tu the above translation,
Tread, eve wy ὁρωγτας τιμᾶν δὲι τουτοις, 8.7.4. To which may be added,

that our author, in paragraph 37, expressly calls the stars visible Gods.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 69

‘them from all these, when they have arrived at maturity,
but ‘not conceiving all of us to be sufficiently worthy to
sacrifice to the Gods. For as all things are not to be
sacrificed to the Gods, so neither perhaps are the Gods
gratified by the sacrifice of every one. This, therefore, is
the substance of the arguments adduced by Theophrastus,
to show that animals ought not to be sacrificed ; exclusive
of the interspersed fabulous narrations, and a few things
which we have added to what he has said. ©
33. I, however, shall not attempt to dissolve the legal
‘institutes which the several nations have established. For
‘iM is not my design at present to speak about a polity.
But as the laws by which we are governed permit us to
venerate divinity by things of the most simple, and of an
inanimate nature, hence, selecting that which is the least
costly, let us sacrifice according to the law of the city,
and endeavour to offer an appropriate sacrifice, approach-
ing with consummate purity to. the Gods. In short, if the
oblation of first-fruits is of any value, and is an acknow-
ledgment of thanks for the benefits which we receive, it
-will be most irrational to abstain ourselves from animals,
-and yet offer the first-fruits of these to the Gods. For
neither are the Gods worse than we are, so as to be in
want of those things of which we are not indigent, nor is
‘it holy to offer the first-fruits of that nutriment from
which we ourselves abstain. For we find it is usual with
-men, that, when they refrain from animal food, they do
not make oblations of animals; but that they offer to the
Gods the first-fruits of what they themselves eat. Hence
also it is now fit, that he who abstains from animals
-should offer the first-fruits of things which he touches
'.[for the purpose of food].
94, Let us therefore also sacrifice, but let us sacrrfice
in sach a manner as is fit, offering different sacrifices to
different powers°®; to the God indeed who is above all

* In the original, Θυσόμον τοίνυν nas ὑμειζ ἀλλα Sucopsey, ὡς weeenss:,
διαφόρους τὰς ϑυσίας, ὡς av διαφόροις δυναμῆσι προσαγοντες, This Valentinus
erroneously translates as follows: “ Sacrificabimus igitur etiam et nos,

70 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

things, as.a certain wise man said, neither sacrifeing with
‘incense, nor congecrating any thing sensible. Fox-thene
is nothing material, which is not immediately impure to
an immaterial nature. Hence, neither is vocal language,
Ror internal speech, adapted to the highest God, when it
is defiled by any passion of the soul; but we should
venerate him in profound silence with a pure soul, and
-with pure conceptions about him. It-is necessary, there-
fore, that being conjoined with and assimilated to him,
‘we should offer to him, as a sacred sacrifice, the elevation
-of our intellect, which offering will. be both ἃ bymn and.
our salvation. In an impassive contemplation, therefore,
of this divinity by the soul, the sacrifice to him is effected
in perfection; but to his progeny, the intelligible Gods,
hymns, orally enunciated, are to be offered. For to each
of the divinities, a sacrifice is to be made of the first-fruits
. of the things which he bestows, and through which he
nourishes and preserves us. As, therefore, the husband-
man offers handfuls of the fruits and berries which the
season first produces; thus also we should offer to the
divinities the first-fruits of our conceptions of their trans-
cendent excellence, giving them thanks for the contem-
plation which they impart to us, and for truly nourishing
us through the vision of themselves, which they afford us,
associating with, appearing to, and shining upon us, for
our salvation. a

35. Now, however, many of those who apply them-
selves to philosophy are unwilling to do this; and,
pursuing renown rather than honouring divinity, they
are busily employed about statues, neither considering
whether they are to be reverenced or not, nor endeayour-
ing to learn from those who are divinely wise, to what
extent, and to what degree, it is requisite to proceed in
this affair. We, however, shalf by no means contend with

sed prout decet, victimas scilicet eximias potestatibus exjmiis addu-
centes.” For διαφόρους and διαφόροις, in this passage, evidently mean
different, and not excellent.

,

ANIMAL FOQD.— BOOK II. 21

these, nor are we very desiraus of heing well instructed
in a thing of this kind; but imitating holy and ancient
men, we offer to the Gods, more than any thing else,
the first-fruits of contemplation, which they have imparted
to us, and by the use of which we become partakers of
true salvation.

36. The Pythagoreans, therefore, diligently applying
themselves to the study of numbers and lines, sacrificed
for the most part from these to the Gods, denominating,
indeed, a certain number Minerva, but another Diana,
and another Apollo: and again, they called one number
justice, but another temperance’. In diagrams also they
adopted a similar mode. And thus, by offerings of this
kind, they rendered the Gods propitious to them, so as
to obtain of them the object of their wishes, by the
things which they dedicated to, and the names -by which
they invoked them. They likewise frequently employed
their aid in divination, and if they were in want of a
certain thing for the purpose of some investigation. In
order, therefore, to effect this, they made use of the Gods
within the heavens, both the erratic and non-erratic, of
all of whom it is requisite to consider the sun as the
leader; but to rank the moon in the second place; and
we should conjoin with these fire, in the third place, from
its alliance to them, as the theologist? says. He also
says that no animal is to be sacrificed ; but that first-
fruits are to be offered from meal and honey, and the
vegetable productions of the earth. He adds, that fire
is not to be enkindled on a hearth defiled with gore; and
agserts other things of the like kind. For what occasion
is there to transcribe all that he says? for he who is 7
studious of piety knows, indeed, that to the Gods no

> Concerning the appellations which the Pythagoreans gave to
numbers, see my Theoretic Arithmetic, in which also the occul¢
meaning of these appellations is unfolded.

4“ Plotinus ni fallor, aut Plato, sed ille potius,” says Reisk; but
every one who is at all conversant with Platonic writera, will imme-
diately see that by the theologist, Porphyry means Orpheus.

72 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

animal is to be sacrificed, but that a sacrifice of this kind
pertains to demons, and other powers, whether they are
beneficent, or depraved", He likewise knows who those

¥ Though Porphyry excelled in all philosophical knowledge, whence
also he was called xa’ ἐξοχὴν, the philosopher, yet he was inferior to
his auditor Iamblichus, in theological infermation. On this account,
Tamblichus was called by all the Platonists posterior to him, the divine,
and -the great priest. I shall present the reader, therefore, with -an
extract from my translation of his treatise on the Mysteries, which
appears to me to be an admirable supplement to what Porphyry has
said in this book, about sacrificing animals, and a satisfactory answer
to the question whether they are to be sacrificed or not.

In Chap. 14, therefore, of Sect. 5, he observes as follows: *’We
. ‘shall begin the elucidation of this subject in the best possible manner,
if we demonstrate that the sacred law of sacrifices is connected with
the order of the Gods. In the first place, therefore, we say, that--of
the Gods some are material, but others immaterial, And the material,
indeed, are those that comprehend matter in themselves, and adorn it;
but the immaterial are those that are perfectly exempt from, and
transcend matter: but, according to the sacrific art, it is requisite to
begin sacred operations from the material Gods; ‘for the ascent to the
‘immaterial Gods will not otherwise be effected. The material Gods,
therefore, have a certain communication with matter, so far as they
' preside over it. Hence they have dominion over things which happen
about matter, such as the division, percussion, repercussion, mutation,
generation, and corruption of all material bodies. He, therefore, who
wishes to worship these theurgically, in a manner adapted to them,
and ‘to the dominion which they are allotted, should, as they are
material, employ a material mode of worship. For thus we shall be
wholly led to a familiarity with them, and worship them in an allied
and appropriate manner. Dead bodies, therefore, and things deprived
of life, the slaying of animals, and the consumption of victims, and, in
‘short, the mutation of the matter which is offered, pertain to these
‘Gods, not by themselves, but on account of the matter over which they
preside. For though they are, in the most eminent degree, separate
from it, yet, at the same time, they are present with it; and, though
they comprehend matter in an immaterial power, yet they are co-
existent with it. Things also that are governed, are not foreign from
their governors; and things which are subservient as instruments, are
not unadapted to those that use them. Hence it is foreign to the
immaterial Gods, to offer matter to them through sacrifices, but this is
most adapted to all the material Gods.”

In the following chapter, Iamblichus observes, “ that as there i is 4

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 73

are that ought to sacrifice to these, and to what extent
they ought -to proceed in the sacrifices which they make.

time when we become wholly soul, are out of the body, and sublimely
sevolve on high, in conjunction with all the immaterial Gods; s0, like-
‘wise, there is a two-fold mode of worship, one of which is simple, incore
‘poreal, and pure from all generation; and this mode pertains to undefiled
souls; but the other is replete with every thing of a material nature, and
is adapted to’souls which are neither pure, nor liberated from all gene-
, Fation.” He adds, “ we must admit, therefore, that there are two-fold —
species of sacrifices; one kind, indeed, pertaining to men who are not
‘entirely purified, which, as Heraclitus says, rarely happens to one man,
or to a certain easily-to-be-numbered few of mankind ; but the other.
kind being material, and consisting in mutation, is adapted to souls that
are still detained by the body. Hence, to cities and people not yet
liberated from sublunary fate, and the impending communion of bodies,
if such a mode of sacrifice as this latter is not permitted, they will wander
both from immaterial and material good. For they will not be able
to receive the former, and to the latter they will not offer what is
appropriate.”

He farther informs us, in Chap. 22, that though the summit of the
sacrific art recurs to the most principal one of the whole multitude of
Gods [i. ¢. to the ineffable cause of all,] and at one.and the same time
worships the many essences and principles that are [rooted and concen-
tred] in it ; yet this happens at the latest period, and to a very few, and

. that we must be satisfied, if it takes place, when the sun of life is setting.
* But,” says he, “ our present discussion does not ordain laws for a man
of this kind ; for he is superior to all law ; but it promulgates a law such
as that of which we are now speaking, to those who are in want of a cer-
tain divine legislation.” In the above passage, by “ a man of this kind,”
Iamblichus most probably alludes to Plotinus, as both his works, and

_ the life of him, written by Porphyry, show that he was a man capable

-of recurring to, and becoining united with the highest God, and thus at

‘the same time worshipping all the divine powers that are rooted in him.

To what Iamblichus has thus excellently observed, may be added

what the philosopher Sallust says in his golden treatise On the Gods and
the World, viz. “ that since life primarily subsists in the Gods, and there
‘1s also a certain human life, but the latter desires to be united to
‘the former, a medium is required ; for natures much distant from each
other cannot be conjoined without a medium; and it is necessary
that the medium should be similar to the connected natures. Life,

‘therefore, must necessarily be the medium of life. Hence, men of the

_ ‘present day that are happy, and all the ancients, have sacrificed animals ;

and this, indeed, not rashly, but in a way accommodated to every God,

74 ' ΟΝ ABSTINENCE FROM

Qther things, however, will be passed over by me jn
silence. But what some Platonists have divulged, 1 shall
lay before the reader, in order that the things proposed
to be discussed, may become manifest to the intelligent.
What they have unfolded, therefore, is as follows:

37. The first God being incorporeal, immoveable, and
impartible, and neither subsisting im any thing, nor
restrained in his energies, is not, as has been before
observed, in want of any thing external to himself, as
neither is the soul of the world; but this latter, contain-
ing in itself the principle of that which is triply divisible,
and being naturally self-motive, is adapted to be moved
in a beautiful and orderly manner, and also to move the
body of the world according to the most excellent
reasons []. 6. productive principles or powers]. It is,
however, connected with and comprehends body, though
it is itself incorporeal, and liberated from the participation
of any passion. To the remaining Gods, therefore, to
the. world, to the inerratic and erratic stars, who are
visible Gods, consisting of soul and body, thanks are to
be returned after the above-mentioned manner, through
sacrifices from inanimate natures. The multitude, there-
fore, of those invisible beings remains for us, whom
Plato indiscriminately calls deemons*; but of these, some
being denominated by men, obtain from them honours,
and other religious observances, similar to those which
are paid to the Gods; but others, who for the most part
are not explicitly denominated, receive an occult religious
reverence and appellation from certain persong in
villages and certain cities; and the remaining multitude
is called in common by the name of demons. The

with many ather ceremonies respecting the cultivation of divinity.” Let .
the truly intellectual and pious man, however, never forget that prayer,
as Proclus divinely observes, possesses of itself a supernatural perfection
and power. |

5 For a more theological account of demops, I refer the reader to
my translation of the before-mentioned admirable treatise of Jamblichus
on the Mysteries.

ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK II. 8

general persuagion, however, respecting all these invistbie
beings, is this, that if they become angry through being
neglected, and deprived of the religious reverence which
‘is due to them, they are noxious to those by whom they
are thus neglected, and that they again become bene-
ficent, if they are appeased by prayers, suppiications, and
sacrifices, and other similar rites.
_, $8. But the confused notioa which is formed of these
beings, and which has proceeded to great crimination,
‘mecessarily requires that the nature of them should be
distinguished according to reason. For perhaps it will
be said, that it is requisite to show whence the error
concerning them originated among men. The distinction,
therefore, must be made after the following manner.
‘Such souls as are the progeny of the whole soul of the
universe, and who govern the great. parts of the region
under the moon, these, being incumbent on a pneumatic
substance or spirit, and ruling over it conformably to
reason, are to be considered as good damons, who are
diligently employed in causing every thing to be bene-
ficial to the subjects of their government, whether they
preside over certain animals, or fruits, which are arranged
ander their inspective care, or over things which subsist
for the sake of these, such as showers of rain, maderate
winds, serene weather, and other things which cooperate
with these, such as the good temperament of the seasons
of the year. They are also our leaders in the attainment
of music, and the whole of erudition, and likewise of
medicine and gymnastic, and of every thing else similar
to these. For it is impossible that these demons should
impart utility, and yet become, in the very same things,
the causes of what is detrimental. Among these two,
those transporters, as Plato calls them, [in his Banquet]
are to be enumerated, who announce the affairs of men
to the Gods, and the will of the Gods to men; carrying
our prayers, indeed, to the Gods as judges, but oracu-
larly unfolding to us the exhortations and admonitions

of the Gods. But such souls as do not rule over the
΄ "

76 ON ABSTINENCE FROM:

pneumatic substance with which they are connected,
but for the most part are vanquished by it; these are
vehemently agitated and borne along [in a disorderly
manner,}] when the irascible motions and the desires of
the pneumatic substance, receive an impetus. These
souls, therefore, are indeed demons, but are deservedly
called malefic demons.
39. All these beings, likewise, and those who possess
a contrary power, are invisible, and perfectly imper-
ceptible by human senses; for they are not surrounded
with a solid body, nor are all of them of one form,
‘but they are fashioned in numerous figures. The forms,
however, which characterize their pneumatic substance,
at one time become apparent, but at another are invisible.
Sometimes also those that are malefic, change their -
forms; but the pneumatic substance, so far as it is
‘corporeal, is passive and corruptible: and though, because
it is thus hound by the souls [that are incumbent on it,]
the form of it remains for a long time, yet it is not
eternal. For it is probable that something continually
flows from it, and also that it is nourished. The pneu-
matic substance, therefore, of good demons, possesses
‘symmetry, in the same manner as the bodies of the visible
Gods; but the spirit of malefic demons 18 deprived 3
of symmetry, and in consequence of its abounding in
passivity, they are distributed about the terrestrial region.
Hence, there is no evil which they do not attempt to
effect ; for, in short, being violent and fraudulent in their
manners, and being also deprived of the guardian care
of more excellent demons, they make, for the most part,
vehement and sudden attacks; sometimes endeavouring
to conceal their incursions, but at other times assaulting
openly. Hence the molestations which are produced by
them are rapid; but the remedies and corrections which
proceed from more excellent demons, appear to be more
slowly effected: for every thing which is good being
tractable and equable, proceeds in an orderly manner,
and does not pass beyond what is fit. By forming this

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 77

epinion, therefore, you will. never fall into that -most,
absurd notion, that evil may be expected from the good,
or good from the evil. For this notion ig not only
attended with absurdity, but the multitude, receiving
through it the most erroneous conceptions of the Gods,
disseminate them among the rest of mankind.

40. It must be admitted, therefore, that one of the
greatest injuries: occasioned by malefic demons is this,
that though they are the causes of the calamities which
take place about the earth, such as pestilence, sterility,
earthquakes, excessive dryness, and the like, yet they
endeavour to persuade us, that they are the causes of
things the most contrary to these, viz. of fertility, [salu-
brity, and elementary peace.] Hence, they exonerate
themselves from blame, and, in the first place, endeavour
to avoid being detected as the sources of injury; and,
in the next place, they convert us to supplications and
sacrifices to the beneficent Gods, as if they were angry.
But they effect these, and things of a similar nature, in
consequence of wishing to turn us from right conceptiona
of the Gods, and convert us to themselves; for they are
delighted with all such as act thus incongruously and
discordantly, and, as it were, assuming the persons of
other Gods, they enjoy the effects of our imprudence
and folly; conciliating to themselves the good opinion,
of the vulgar, by inflaming the minds of men with the
love of riches, power, and pleasure, and filling them with,
the desire .of vain glory, from which sedition, and war, *
and other things allied to these, are produced. But
that which is the most dire of all things, they proceed
still farther, and persuade men that similar things are
effected by the greatest Gods, and do not stap till they
even subject the most excellent of the divinities to these
calumnies, through whom they say every thing is in
perfect confusion. And not only the vulgar are affected
in this manner, but not a few also of those who are
conversant with philosophy. The cause of this, however,
extends equally to philosophers, and the vulgar; for of.

48 ON ABSTINENCE FROM.

philosophers, those wlio do not depart from the prevailiny
notions, fall into the same error with the multitude ;
and apain, the multitude, on hearing assertions from cele-
brated men conformable to their own opinions, are in a
greater degree corroborated in conceiving things of this
kind of the Gods..

41. For poetry also inflames the opinions of men, by
employing a diction adapted to produc? astonishment
and enchantment, and not only allures the ears, but is.
also capable of procuring belief in things that are most
impossible. At the same time, however, it is requisite
to be firmly persuaded, that what is good can never’
injure, nor what is evil can ever be beneficial; for, as:
Plato says, it is not the province of heat to refrigerate,
but of that which is contrary to heat; and, in like’
manner, neither is it the province of that which is just
to injure. But divinity is naturally the mést just of αἱ.
things; since otherwise he would not be divinity. Hence
this power and portion of goed is not to be abscinded
from beneficent demons; for the power which is natu-
rally adapted, and wishes to injure, is contrary to the’
power which is beneficent: but contraries can never
sabsist about. the same thing. As malefic demons,
therefore, injure the mortal race in many respects, and’
sometimes in things of the greatest consequence, good’
dwamons not only never cease to act conformably to therr’
office, but alsa, as: much as possible, presignify to us the: .
dangers which are. impéndent from malefic demons,
unfelding these throogh dreams, through a divinely
inspired soul, and through many other things; so that
he who is capable of explaining what is signified, may’
know and avoid all the perils with which he is threatened.’
For they indicate [future events] to all men, but every’
one cannot understand what they indicate, nor is every’
ene able to read what is written by them; but he alone
is able.to do this; who-has learnt their letters. All
enchantment, however, [or witchcraft,] 185. effected through:
demons of a contrary nature; for those who perpetrate

ANIMAL ΣΟΟΡ.-ΒΟΟΚ IT. τ ἥδ

evil through enchantments, especially venerate these
malefic beings, and the power that presides over them.

42. For they are full of every kind of imagination,
and are sufficiently qualified to deceive, through effects
of a prodigious nature; and through these, unhappy men
precute philtres, and amatory allurements. For ali
intemperance, and hope of possessing wealth and renown,
and especially deception, “exist through these, since
falsehood is allied to these malevolent beings; for they
wish to be considered as Gols, and the power which presides
over them is ambitious to appear to be the greatest God,
These are they that rejoice in libations, and the savour
of sacrifices, through which their pneumatic vehicle is
fattened; for this vehicle lives through vapours and
exhalations, and the life of it is various through various
exhalations. It is likewise corroborated by the savour of
blood and flesh.

48. On this account, a wise and temperate man wilt
be religiously afraid to use sacrifices of this kind, through
which he will attract to himself such-like dewons; bat
he will endeavour in all possible ways to purify his soul.
For these malefic beings do not attack a pure soul,
because it is dissimilar to them; but if it is. necessary to
cities to render them propitious, this is nothing to us,
For by these riches, and things external and corporeal,
are thought to be good, and their contraries evil; but
the smallest attention is paid by them to the good of the
soul. We however, to the utmost of our ability, endea-
vour not to be in want of those things which they.
impart; but all our endeavour is to become similar to:
_ God, and to the [divine] powers with which he is sur
rounded both from what pertains to the soul, and from
externals ; and this ts effected through an entire liberation
From the dominion of the passions, an evolved perception of
truly existing beings, and a vital tendency towards them.
On the other hand, we strive to become dissimilar to,
depraved men and evil demons, and, in short, to every.
being that rejoices in a mortal and material nature. So.

80 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

that, conformably to what is said by Theophrastus, we |
also shall sacrifice from those things which theologistg
permit us to use.for this purpose; as well knowing, that
by how much the more we neglect to exempt ourselveg
from the passions of the soul, by so much the more we
connect ourselves with a depraved power, and render it
necessary that he should become propitious to us. For,
as theologists say, it is necessary that those who are
bound‘ to things external, and have not yet vanquished
their passions, should avert the anger of this [malefic]
power; since, if they do not, there will be no end to their
labours.

44. Thus far what pertains to sacrifices has been elue
eidated. As we said, however, at first, as it is not entirely
necessary, if animals are to be sacrificed, that they are
also. ta be eaten, we shall now show that it is necessary:
we should not eat them, though it may be sometimeg
hecessary that they should be sacrificed. For all theo-
logists agree in this, that in sacrifices, which are made for
the purpose of averting some evil, the immolated animals
are not to be tasted, but are to be used as expiations.
For, say they, no one should go into the city, nor into his
own house, till he has first purified his garments, and his
body, in rivers, or some fountain. So that they order
those whom they permit to sacrifice, to abstain from the
victims, and to purify themselves before they sacrifice by
fasting, and especially by abstaining from animals. They
add, that purity ts the guardian of piety ; and ts, as tt were,
a symbol or divine seal, which secures tts possessor from the
attacks and allurements of evil demons. For such a one,
being contrarily disposed to, and more divine in his

© In the original, ὡς yag φασὶν os Sasdeyo: τοῖς δεομένοις ὑπὸ τῶν exrog nas
μηδέπω xgarour των παθῶν, x. τι Δ, But for δεομένοις, it is necessary to
read δεδεμένος; and it is evident that both the Latin translators of this
work found δεδεμένοις in their manuscripts. For Felicianus has “ qui
devincti exterhis rebus sunt,” and Valentinus, “ qui rebus externis #ls-
gextur.” Reisk, howery ry has taken no notice of this error in the
printed text. =

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 81

operations than those by whom he is attacked, because
he is more pure both in his body and in the passions of
his soul, remains uninjured, in consequence of being sur-
rounded with purity as with a bulwark. |

45. Hence a defence of this kind has appeared to be
necessary even to enchanters; though it is not effica-
cious with them on all occasions. For they invoke evil
demons for lascivious purposes. So that purity does not
belong to enchanters, but to divine men, and such as are
divinely wise; since it every where becomes a guard to
those that use it, and conciliates them with a divine
nature. I wish, therefore, that enchanters would make
use of purity continually, for then they would not employ
themselves in incantations, because, through this, they
would be deprived of the enjoyment of those things, for
the sake of which they act impiously. Whence becoming
full of passions, and abstaming for a short time from
impure food, they are notwithstanding replete with impu-
tity, and suffer the punishment of their illegal conduct
towards the whole of things, partly from those whom
they irritate, and partly from Justice, who perceives all
mortal deeds and conceptions. Both inward, therefore,
and external purity pertain to a divine man, who earnestly
endeavours to be liberated from the passions of the soul,
and who abstains from such food as excites the passions,
and is fed with divine wisdom ; and by right conceptions
of, is assimilated to divinity himself. For such a man,
bejng consecrated by an intellectual sacrifice, approaches
to God in a white garment, and with a truly pure impas-
sivity of soul, and levity of body, and is not burdened
with foreign and external juices, and the passions of the
soul. .

46. For, indeed, it must not be admitted as necessary
in temples, which are consecrated by men to the Gods,
that those who enter into them should have their feet
pure, and their shoes free from every stain, but that in
the temple of the father [of all], which 1s this world, it 15
not proper to preserve our ultimate and cutaneous vest-

- G

82 ON ABSTINENCE FROM —

ment pure, and to dwell in this temple with an undefiled
garment. For if the danger consisted only in the defile-
ment of the body, it might, perhaps, be lawful to neglect
it. But now, since every sensible body is attended with
an efflux of material demons, hence, together with the
impurity produced from flesh and blood, the power which
is friendly to, and familiar with, this impurity, is at the
same time present through similitude and alliance.

47, Hence theologists have rightly paid attention to
abstinence. And these things were indicated to us by ἃ
certain Egyptian", who also assigned a most natural
cause of them, which was verified by experience. For,
since a depraved and irrational soul, when it leaves the
body, is still compelled to adhere to it, since the souls
also of those men who die by violence, are detained
about the body ; this circumstance should prevent a man
- from forcibly expelling his soul from the body. The
violent slaughter, therefore, of animals, compels souls
to be delighted with the bodies which they have left, but
the soul is by no means prevented from being there,
where. it is attracted by a kindred nature ; whence many
souls are seen to lament, and some remain about the
bodies that are unburied; which souls are improperly
used by enchanters, as subservient to their designs, being
compelled by them to occupy the body, or a part of the
body, which they have left. Since, therefore, these things
were well known to theologists, and they also perceived
the nature of a depraved soul, and its alliance to the

υ Reisk, with his usual stupidity, where merely verbal emendations
are not concerned, says that this Egyptian is Plotinus, whose country
was Lycopolis, in Egypt. But what instance can be adduced, in all
antiquity, of the disciple of a philosopher speaking of his preceptor in
this indefinite manner? Is it not much more probable that this Egyptian
is the priest mentioned by Porphyry in his Life of Plotinus, who, at the
request of a certain friend of Plotinus, (which friend was, perhaps, Por-
phyry himself,) exhibited to Plotinus, in the temple of Isis, at Rome, the
familiar demon, or, in modern language, the ‘guardian angel of that
philosopher ? -

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 83

bodies from which it was divulsed, and the pleasure
which it received from a union with them, they very pro-
perly avoided animal food, in order that they might not
be disturbed by alien souls, violently separated from the
body and impure, and which are attracted to things of a
kindred nature, and likewise that they might not be
impeded by the presence of evil demons, in approaching
alone [or without being burdened with things of a foreign
nature] to the highest God *.

48. For that the nature of a kindred body is attractive
of soul, experience abundantly taught these theologists.
Hence those who wish to receive into themselves the
souls of prophetic animals, swallow the most principal
parts of them, such as the hearts of crows, or of moles, or
of hawks. For thus they have soul present with, and
predicting to them like a God, and entering into them
together with the intromission of the body.

49. Very properly, therefore, will the philosopher, and
who is also the priest of the God that is above all things,
abstain from all animal food, in consequence of earnestly
endeavouring to approach through himself alone to the
alone’ God, without being disturbed by any attendants.
Such a one likewise is cautious, as being well acquainted
with the necessities of nature. For he who is truly a
philosopher, is skilled in, and an observer of many things,
understands the works of nature, is sagacious, temperate

* Conformably to this, the Pythagorean Demophilus beautifully
observes, Tupevog ἀποστάλεις σοφος, γυμνιτεέυων κάλεσει Tov πέμψαντα" μόνου γαρ τοὺ
μη τοῖς ἀλλοτρίοις πεφορτίσμενου ἐπήκοος οϑεος, ὃ, 6. “* The wise man being sent
hither naked, should naked invoke him by whom he was sent. For he
alone is heard by divinity, who is not burdened with things of a foreign
nature.”

Y This expression of “ approaching alone to the alone God,” Por
phyry derived from his master, the great Plotinus, who divinely con-
cludes his Enneads as follows: — καὶ ourw Seay καὶ avSewrov ϑειων καὶ ευδαι-
μονῶν Biog, atradrayn τῶν ἄλλων τῶν nde, ἀγηδονος τῶν τηδδ, puyn μεόνου ἀτρος μμογον----
ὁ. 6. “ This, therefore, is the life of the Gods, and of divine and happy
men, a liberation from all terrene concerns, a life unaccompanied by
buman pleasures, and a flight of the alone to the alone.”

84 ‘ON ABSTINENCE FROM

and modest, and is in every respect the saviour of him-
self. And as he who is the priest of'a certain particular
God, is skilled in placing the statues of that divinity, and
in his orgies, mysteries, and the like, thus also he who is
the priest of the highest God, is skilled in the manner in
which his statue ought'to be fashioned, and in purifi-
cations, and other things through which he is conjoined
to this divinity.

50. But if in the sacred rites which are here, those
that are priests and diviners order both themselves and
others’ to abstain from sepulchres, from impious men,
from-menstrual purgations, and from venereal congress,
and likewise from base and mournful spectacles, and
from those auditions which excite the passions, (because
frequently, through those that are present being impure,
something appears which disturbs the diviner; on which
account it is said, that to sacrifice inopportunely, is at-
‘tended with greater detriment than gain); — if this, there-
fore, is the case, will he, who is the priest of the father of
all things, suffer himself to become the sepulchre of dead
‘bodies? And will such a one, being full of defilement,
endeavour to associate with the transcendent God? It is
sufficient, indeed, that in fruits we assume parts of death,
for the support of our present life. This, however, is not
yet ‘the place for such a discussion. We must, therefore,
‘still farther investigate what pertains to sacrifices.

51. For some one may say that we shall subvert a
‘great part of divination, viz. that which is effected through
an inspection of the viscera, if we abstain from destroying
-animals. He, therefore, who makes this objection, should
also destroy men: for it is said that future events are
more apparent in the viscera of men than in those of
-brutes ; and many of the Barbarians exercise the art of
divination through the entrails of men. As, however, it
would be an indication of great injustice, and inex-
haustible avidity, to destroy those of our own species for
' the sake of divination, thus also it is unjust for the sake
of this to slay an irrational animal. But it does not

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK Il. 85

belong to the present discussion to investigate whether
Gods, or demons, or soul liberated from the animal [with
which it had been connected], exhibit signs of future
events to those who explore such. signs, through the
indications which the viscera afford.

52. Nevertheless, we permit those whose life is rolled
about externals, having once acted impiously towards
themselves, to be borne along to that to which they tend ;
- .but we rightly say, that the man whom we designate as a
philosopher, and who is separated from. externals, will not
be disturbed by demons, nor be in want of diviners, nor
of the viscera of animals. For he earnestly endeavours
to be separated from those things for the sake of which
divinations are effected. For he does not betake himself
to nuptials, in order that he may molest the diviner about
wedlock, or merchandise, or inquiries about a servant,
or an increase of property, or any other object of vulgar
pursuit. For the subjects of his investigation:are not
clearly indicated by any diviner or viscera of animals.
But he, as we have said, approaching through himself to
the [supreme] God, who is established in the true inward
parts of himself, receives from thence the precepts of
eternal life, tending thither by a conflux of the whole of
himself, and instead of a diviner praying that he may ἡ
become a confabulator of the mighty Jupiter.

53. For if such a one is impelled by some necessary
circumstance, there are good demons, who, to the man
- living after this manner, and who is a domestic of
- divinity, will indicate and prevent, through dreams and
symbols, and omens, what may come to pass, and what is
necessarily to be avoided. For it is only requisite to
depart from evil, and to know what is most honourable
in the whole of things, and every thing which in the
universe is good, friendly, and familiar. But vice, and an
ignorance of divine concerns, are dire, through which a
man is led to despise and defame things of which he has
no knowledge; since nature does not proclaim these par-
ticulars with a voice which can be heard by the ears,

86 ΟΝ ABSTINENCE FROM

but being herself intellectual *, she initiates through intel-
lect those who venerate her. And even though some one
should admit the art of divination for the sake of pre- _
dicting what is future, yet it does not from thence neces-
sarily follow that the flesh of animals is to be eaten; as
neither does it follow, that because it is proper to sacri-
fice to Gods or demons, food from animals is therefore to
be introduced. For, not only the history which is related
by Theophrastus, but also many other narrations inform
us, that in ancient times men were sacrificed, yet it must
not be inferred that on this account men are to be eaten.

54. And that we do not carelessly assert these things,
but that what we have said is abundantly confirmed by
history, the following narrations sufficiently testify. For
in Rhodes, on the sixth day of June, a man was sacri-
ficed to Saturn; which custom having prevailed for a
long time, was afterwards changed [into a more human
mode of sacrificing]. For one of those men who, by the
public decision, had been sentenced to death, was kept in
prison till the Saturnalia commenced; but.as soon as
this festival began, they brought the man out of the gates
of the city, opposite to the temple of Aristobulus, and
giving him wine to drink, they cut his throat. But in the
island which is now called Salamis, but was formerly
denominated Coronis, in the month according to the
Cyprians Aphrodisius, a man was sacrificed to Agraule,
the daughter of Cecrops, and the nymph Agraulis. And
this custom continued till the time of Diomed. After-

2 Nature, considered as the last of the causes which fabricate this
corporeal and sensible world, “ bounds (says Proclus in Tim.) the pro-
gressions of incorporeal essences, and is full of forms and powers,
through which she governs mundane affairs. And she is a Goddess,
indeed, considered as deified; but not according to the primary signi-
fication of the word. By her summit likewise she comprehends the
heavens, but through these rules over the fluctuating empire of genera-
tion ; and she every where weaves together partial natures in admirable
conjunction with wholes.” See more on this subject i in my translation
. of that work,

ar)

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK II. 87

wards it was changed, so that ἃ man was sacrificed to
Diomed. But the temples of Minerva, of Agraule, and
Diomed, were contained in one and the same enclosure.
The man also who was about to be slain, was first led by
young men thrice round the altar, afterwards -the priest
. pierced him with a lance in the stomach, and thus being
thrown on the pyre, he was entirely consumed.

55. This sacred institute was, however, abolished by:
Diphilus, the king of Cyprus, who flourished about the
time of Seleucus, the theologist. But Demon substi-
tuted an ox for a man; thus causing the latter sacrifice
to be of equal worth with the former. Amosis also
abolished the law of sacrificing men in the Egyptian city
Heliopolis ; the truth of which is testified by Manetho in
his treatise on Antiquity and Piety. But the sacrifice
was made to Juno, and an investigation took place, as if
they were endeavouring to find pure calves, and such as
were marked by the impression of a seal. Three men
also were sacrificed on the day appointed for this pur-
‘pose, in the place of whom Amosis ordered them to
substitute three waxen images. In Chios likewise, they
sacrificed a man to Omadius Bacchus *, the man being for
this purpose torn in pieces; and the same custom, as
Euelpis Carystius says, was adopted in Tenedos. To
‘which may be added, that the Lacedemonians, as Apol-
lodorus says, sacrificed a man to Mars.

56. Moreover the Pheenicians, in great calamities,

* This epithet is used in two of the Orphic hymns, viz. in Hymn LI.
7., and Hymn XXIX. 5. But the following appears to be the reason
why Bacchus is so called. Bacchus is the intellect, and Ippa the soul of
the world, according to the Orphic Theology ; and the former is said by
Orpheus to be carried on the head of the latter. For so we are informed
by Proclus, in Tim. p. 124. Jacob de Rhoer, therefore, the editor of
this work, was grossly mistaken in saying, “ Non dubito, quin «adc
Διονυσος, idem sit qui ὠμηστης, crudivorus.” Scaliger, in his version of the
Hymns, very improperly translates ὡμάδιος bajulus, a porter. For

_ Bacchus is carried on, but does not carry Ippa. .

88 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

either of war, or excessive dryness, or pestilence, sacri-
ficed some one of their dearest friends, who was seleeted
by votes for this purpose. The Phenician history also
is replete with instances of men being sacrificed, which
history was written by Sanchoniatho in the Pheenician
tongue, and was interpreted into Greek in eight books,
by Philo Byblius. But Ister, in his collection of the
Cretan sacrifices, says that the Curetes formerly sacri- .
ficed children to Saturn. And Pallas, who is the best of
those that have collected what pertains to the mysteries
of Mithras, says, that under the Emperor Adrian the
sacrificing of men was nearly totally abolished. For,
prior to his time, in Laodicea, which is in Syria, they
anciently sacrificed a virgin to Minerva, but now they
sacrifice a stag. The Carthaginians too, who dwell in
Libya, formerly sacrificed men; but this custom was
abolished by Iphicrates. And the Dumatii, a people of
Arabia, annually sacrificed a boy, whom they buried
under the altar, which was used by them as a statue.
But Phylarchus narrates, that it was the general custom of
all the Greeks, before they went to war, to immolate men.
I omit to mention the Thracians and Scythians, and also
the Athenians, who slew the daughter of Erechtheus and
Praxithea. And even at present, who 18 ignorant that
in the great city of Rome, in the festival of Jupiter La-
tialis, they cut the throat of aman? Human flesh, how-
ever, is not on this account to be eaten; though, through”
a certain necessity, a man should be sacrificed. For,
when a famine takes place during a siege, some of the
besieged feed on each other, yet at the same time those
who do so are deemed execrable, and the deed is thought
to be impious.

57. After the first war, likewise, waged by the Romans
against the Carthaginians, in order to obtain Sicily, when
the mercenary soldiers of the Phcenicians revolted, and,
together with them, those of Africa deserted, Amilcar,
who was surnamed Barkas, in attacking the Romans, was

ANIMAL FOOD;:-—BOOK It. 89

reduced to such a scarcity of food, that at first his men
ate those that fell in battle ; but afterwards, these failing,
they ate their captives ; in the third place, their servants ;
and in the last place, they attacked each other, and
devoured their fellow-soldiers, who were led to be slaugh-
tered for this purpose by lot. But Amilcar, taking those
men that were in his power, caused his elephants to
trample on such of the soldiers as had acted in this
manner, conceiving that it was not holy to suffer them to
be any longer mingled with other men; and neither did
he admit that men should be eaten because certain per-
sons had dared to do this; nor his son Hannibal, who,
when he was leading his army into Italy, was advised by
a certain person to accustom his troops to feed on human
flesh, in order that they might never be in want of food.
It does not follow, therefore, that because famine and
war have been the causes of eating other animals, it is
also requisite to feed on them for the sake of pleasure; as
neither must we admit, that on this account men are to be
eaten. Nor does it follow, that because animals are
sacrificed to certain powers, it is also requisite to eat
them. For neither do those who sacrifice men, on this
account, feed on human flesh. Through what has been
said, therefore, it is demonstrated, that it does not
entirely follow that animals are to be eaten because they
are sacrificed.

58. But that those who had learnt what the nature is
of the powers in the universe, offered sacrifices through
blood, not to Gods, but to demons, is confirmed by
theologists themselves. For they also assert, that or
deemons, some are malefic, but others beneficent, who will
not molest us, if we offer to them the first-fruits of those
things alone which we eat, and by which we nourish
either the soul or the body. After, therefore, we have
added a few observations more, in order to show that the
unperverted conceptions of the multitude accord with
a right opinion respecting the Gods, we shall conclude

\

90 OQN ABSTINENCE FROM -

this book. Those poets, therefore, who are wise, though.
but in a small degree, say,

What man so credulous and void of mind,
What man so ignorant, as to think the Gods
In fiery bile and fleshless bones rejoice,

For haugry dogs a nutriment not fit ;

Or that such offerers they will e’er reward?

But another poet says,

My offerings to the Gods from cakes alone
And frankincense shall be ; for not to friends
But deities my sacrifice I make.

59. Apollo also, when he orders men to sacrifice
according to paternal institutes, appears to refer every
thing to ancient custom. But the ancient custom of
sacrificing was, as we have before shown, with cakes and
fruits. Hence also, sacrifices were called ϑυσιαι, thusiat, |
and ϑυηλαι, thuelat, and ϑυμελαι, thumelai, and avro +o Susi,
auto to thuein, i. 6. the act of sacrificing, signified the same
thing as τοὺ Suuiav, tou thumian, i. 6. to offer incense, and
which is now called by us, em:9vew, epithuein, i. 6. to sacrifice
something more. For what we now call Svew, thuein, ὃ, e. to
sacrifice, the ancients denominated ερδὲιν, erdein, ὦ i. 6. to per-
form or make.

They perfect hecatombs of bulls, or goats,
Made to Apollo.

60. But those who introduced costliness into sacri-
fices, were ignorant that, in conjunction with this, they
also introduced a swarm of evils, viz. superstition, luxury,
an opinion that a divine nature may. be corrupted by
gifts, and that a compensation may be made by sacrifices
for injustice. Or whence do some make an oblation
of three animals with gilded horns, but others of heca-
tombs? And whence did Olympias, the mother of Alex-
ander [the Great,] sacrifice a thousand of each species of
animals, unless sumptuousness had at length proceeded to

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK: II. . 2g)

superstition? But when the young man was informed
that the Gods rejoiced in magnificent sacrifices, and,
as they say, in solemn banquets of oxen and other ani-
mals, how, though he was willing to act wisely, was it
possible that he could? How also, when he conceived
that, these sacrifices were acceptable to the Gods, was it
possible he should not fancy that he was permitted to
act unjustly, when he might exonerate himself from
erroneous conduct through sacrifices? But if he had
been persuaded that the Gods have no need of these
things, and that they look to the manners of those who
approach to them, and conceive that a right opinion of them,
and of things themselves, ts the greatest sacrifice, how is it
possible that he should not have heen temperate, holy,
and just ? . . ΄

61. To the Gods, indeed, the most excellent offering
is ἃ pure intellect and an impassive soul, and also a
moderate oblation of our own property and of other
things, and this not negligently, but with the greatest
alacrity. For the honours which we pay to the Gods
should be accompanied by the same promptitude as that
with which we give the first seat to worthy men, and
with which we fise to, and salute them, and not by
the promptitude with which we pay a tribute. For man
must not use such language as the following to God:

If, O Philinus, you recal to mind,

And love me for, the benefits which I

On you conferr’d, ‘tis well, since for the sake
-Of these alone my bounty was bestow’d.

For divinity is not satisfied with such assertions as
these. And hence Plato says [in his Laws], that it
pertains to a good man to sacrifice, and to be always
conversant with the Gods by prayers, votive offerings,
sacrifices, and every kind of religious worship; but that
to the bad man, much labour about the Gods is ineffica-
cious and vain. For the good man knows what ought to, .
be sacrificed, and from what it is requisite to abstain;

92 ON ABSTINENCE, &c. |

what things are to be offered to divinity, and of what the
first-fruits are to be sacrificed; but the bad man exhi-
biting honours to the Gods from his own disposition and
his own pursuits, acts in so doing more impiously than
piously. Hence Plato thought, that a philosopher ought
not to be conversant with men of depraved habits ; for
this is neither pleasing to the Gods, nor useful to men ;
but the philosopher should endeavour to change such
men to a better condition, and if he cannot effect this, he
should be careful that he does not himself become
changed into their depravity. He adds, that having
entered into the right path, he should proceed in it,
neither fearing danger from the multitude, nor any, other
blasphemy which may happen to take place. For it
would be a thing of a dire nature, that the Syrians indeed
will not taste fish, nor the Hebrews swime, nor most of the
Phosnicians and Egyptians cows; and though many kings
have endeavoured to change these customs, yet those
that adopt them would rather suffer death, than a trans-
gression of the law [which forbids them to eat these
animals]; and yet that we should choose to transgress the
laws of nature and divine precepts through the fear of
men, or of a certain denunciation of evil from them. For
the divine. choir of Gods, and divine men, may justly
be greatly indignant with us, if it perceives us directing
our attention to the opinions of depraved men, and idly
looking to the terror with which they are attended,
though we daily meditate how we may become [philoso-
phically] dead to other things in the present life.

ΟΝ

ABSTINENCE FROM ANIMAL FOOD.
BOOK THE THIRD.

i. In the two preceding books, O Firmus Castricius,-we
have demonstrated, that animal food does not contribute
either to temperance and frugality, or to the piety which
especially gives completion to the theoretic life, but
-1s rather hostile to it. Since, however, the most beautiful
part of justice consists in piety to the Gods, and this
is principally acquired through abstinence, there is no
occasion to fear that we shall violate justice towards men,
while we preserve piety towards the Gods. Socrates
therefore says, in opposition to those who contend that
pleasure is the supreme good, that though all swine and
goats should aceord in this opinion, yet he should never
be persuaded that our felicity was placed in the enjoy-
ment of corporeal delight, as long as intellect has domi-
nion over all things. And we also say, that though
all wolves and vultures should praise the eating of flesh,
we should not admit that they spoke justly, as long as man
is by nature innoxious, and ought to abstain from procuring
. pleasure for himself by injuring others. We shall pass
on, therefore, to the discussion of justice; and since our
opponents say that this ought only to be extended to
those of a similar species, and on this account deny that
irrational animals can be injured by men, let us exhibit
the true, and at the same time Pythagoric opinion,
and demonstrate that every soul which participates of

O44 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

sense and memory is rational. For this being demon-
strated, we may extend, as our opponents will also admit,
justice to every animal. But we shall epitomize what
has been said by the ancients on this subject.

2. Since, however, with respect to reason, one kind,
according to the doctrine of the Stoics, is internal, but
the other external*; and again, one kind being right, but
the other erroneous, it is requisite to explain of which
of these two, animals, according to them, are deprived.
Are they therefore deprived of right reason alone? or are
they entirely destitute both of internal and externally
proceeding reason? They appear, indeed, to ascribe to
brutes an entire privation of reason, and not a privation
of right reason alone. For if they merely denied that
brutes possess right reason, animals would not be irra+
tional, but rational beings, in the same manner’as nearly
all men are according to them. For, according to their
opinion, one ot two wise men may be found in whom
alone right reason prevails, but all the rest of mankind are
depraved ; though some of these make a certain pros
ficiency, but others are profoundly depraved, and yet, at
the same time, all of them are similarly rational. Through
the influence, therefore, of self-love, they say, that all
other enimals are irrational ; wishing to indicate by irra-
tionality, an entire privation of reason. If, however, it be
requisite to speak the ‘truth, not only reason may plainly
be perceived in all animals, but in many of them it is so
great as to approximate to perfection.

3. Since, therefore, reason is two-fold, one kind con-
sisting in external speech, but the other in the disposition
of the soul, we shall begin from that which is external,
and which is arranged according to the voice. . But if
‘external reason is voice, which through the tongue is sig-
nificant of the internal passions of the soul (for this is the
mhost common definition of it, and is not adopted by one
sect [of philosophers] only, and if it is alone indicative of

2 This external reason (λογας exgopopeos) 15 speech.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 98

the conception of [internal] reason) — if this be the case,
in what pertaining to this are such animals as have 4
voice deficient? Do they not discursively perceive the
manner in which they are inwardly affected, before it
is vocally enunciated by them? By a discursive percep-
tion, however, I mean the perception produced by the
silent discourse which takes place in the soul. Since,
therefore, that which is vocally expressed by the tongue
18 reason, in whatever manner it may be expressed,
whether in a barbarous or a Grecian, a canine or a bovine
mode, other animals also participate of it that are vocal ;
men, indeed, speaking conformably to the human laws
[of speech], but other animals conformably to the laws
which they received from the Gods and nature. But
if we do not understand what they say, what is this
to the purpose? For the Greeks do not understand what
is said by the Indians, nor those who are educated in Attica
the language of the Scythians, or Thracians, or Syrians ;
but the sound of the one falls on the ears of the other
hke the clangor of cranes, though by others their
vocal sounds can be written and articulated, in the same
manner as ours can by us. Nevertheless, the vocal
sounds of the Syrians, for instance, or the Persians, are
to us inarticulate, and ‘cannot be expressed by writing,
just as the speech of animals is unintelligible to all men.
For as we, when we hear the Scythians speak, apprehend,
by the auditory sense, a noise only and a sound, but are
ignorant of the meaning of what they say, because their
language appears to us to be nothing but a clangor, to
have no articulation, and to employ only one sound
either longer or shorter, the variety of which is not at all
significant to us, but to them the vocal sounds are intel-
ligible, and have a great difference, in the sathe manner
as our language has to us; the like also takes placé
in the vocal sounds: of other animals. For the several
species of these understand the language which is adapted
to them, but we only hear a sound, of the signification of
which we are ignorant, because no one who has learnt

96 ON ABSTINENCE FROM .

our language, is able to teach us through ours the meaning
of what is said by brutes. If, however, it is requisite
to believe in the ancients, and also in those who have
lived in our times, and the times of our fathers, there are
some among these who are said to have heard and to
have understood the speech of animals. Thus, for in-
stance, this is narrated of Melampus and Tiresias, and
others of the like kind; and the same thing, not much
prior to our time, is related of Apollonius Tyanaus. For
it is narrated of him, that once, when he was with his
associates, a swallow happening to be present, and twit-
tering, he said, that the swallow indicated to other birds,
that an ass laden with corn had fallen down before
the city, and that in consequence of the fall of the_ass,
the corn was spread on the ground». An associate, also,
of mine informed me, that he once had a boy for a
servant, who understood the meaning of all the sounds of
birds, and who said, that all of them were prophetic, and
declarative of what would shortly happen. He added,
that he was deprived of this knowledge through his’
mother, who, fearing that he would be sent to the
Emperor as a gift, poured urine into his ear when he was
asleep.

4. Omitting, however, these things, through the
passion of incredulity, which is connascent with us,
I think there is no one who is ignorant, that there are
some nations even now who understand the sounds of
certain animals, through an alliance to those animals.
Thus, the Arabians understand the language of crows,
and the Tyrrhenians of eagles. And, perhaps, all men
would understand the language of all animals, if a dragon
were to lick their ears. Indeed, the variety and differ-
ence in the vocal sounds of animals, indicate that they
are significant. Hence, we hear one sound when they
are terrified, but another, of a different kind, when they
call their associates, another when they summon their

> Philostratus relates this of Apollonius, in his Life of him.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IIT, 97

young to food, another when they lovingly embrace each
other, and another when they incite to battle. And so
great is the difference in their vocal sounds, that, even by
those who have spent their whole life in the observation
of them, it is found to be extremely difficult to ascertain
their meaning, on account of their multitude. Diviners,
therefore, who predict from ravens and crows, when they
have noted the difference of the sounds, as far as to a
certain multitude, omit the rest, as not easily to be appre-
hended by man... But when animals speak to each other,
these sounds are manifest and significant to them, though
they are not known to all of us. If, however, it appears
that they imitate us, that they learn the Greek tongue,
and understand their keepers, what man is so impudent
as not to grant that they are rational, because he does
not understand what they say? Crows, therefore, and
magpies, the robin redbreast, and the parrot, imitate men,
recollect what they have heard, are obedient to their pre-
ceptor while he is teaching them; and many of them,
through what they have learnt, point out those that have
acted wrong in the house. But the Indian hyena, which
the natives call crocotta, speaks in a manner so human,
and this without a teacher, as to go to houses, and call
that person whom he knows he can easily vanquish. He
also imitates the voice of him who is most dear, and
would most readily attend to the person whom he calls ;
so that, though the Indians know this, yet being deceived
through the similitude, and obeying the call, they come
forth, and are destroyed. If, however, all animals do not
imitate, and all of them are not adapted to learn our
language, what is this to the purpose? For neither is
every man docile or imitative, I will not say of the vocal
sounds of animals, but of the five dialects of the Greek
tongue. To which may be added, that some animals,
perhaps, do not speak, because they have not been taught,
or because they are impeded by the ill conformation of
the instruments of speech. We, therefore, when we were
at Carthage, nurtured a tame partridge, which we caught
Η

98 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

flying, and which, in process of time, and by associating

with us, became so exceedingly mild, that it was not only

sedulously attentive to us, caressed and sported with us, —
but uttered a sound corresponding to the sound of our

voice, and, as far as it was capable, answered us; and this

in a manner different from that by which partridges are

accustomed to call each other. For it did not utter a

corresponding sound when we were silent, but when we

spoke to it.

5. It is also narrated, that some dumb animals obey
their masters with more readiness than any domestic
servants. Hence, a lamprey was so accustomed to the
Roman Crassus, as to come to him when he called it by
its name; on which account Crassus was so affectionately
disposed towards it, that he exceedingly lamented its
death, though, prior to this, he had borne the loss of
three of his children with moderation. Many likewise
relate that the eels in Arethusa, and the shell-fish de-
nominated saperde, about Meander, are obedient to
those that callthem. Is not the imagination, therefore,
of an animal that speaks, the same, whether it proceeds
as far as to the tongue, or does not? And if this be the
case, is it not absurd to call the voice of man alone
[external] reason, but refuse thus to denominate the
voice of other animals? For this is just as if crows
should think that their voice alone is external reason,
but that we are irrational animals, because the meaning
of the sounds which we utter is not obvious to them;
or as if the inhabitants of Attica should thus denomi-
nate their speech alone, and should think that those
are irrational who are ignorant of the Attic tongue,
though the inhabitants of Attica would sooner under-
stand the croaking of a crow, than the language of a
Syrian or a Persian. But is it not absurd to judge of
rationality and irrationality from apprehending or not
apprehending the meaning of vocal sounds, or from
silence and speech? For thus some one might say, that
_ the God who is above all things, and likewise the other

ΑΔ τινος, εἰ

/

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 99

.Gods, are not rational, because they do not speak. The

Gods, however, silently indicate their will, and birds
apprehend their will more rapidly than men, and when
they have apprehended it, they narrate it to men as much
as they are able, and different birds are the messengers to
men of different Gods. Thus, the eagle is the messenger
of Jupiter, the hawk and the crow of Apollo, the stork of
Juno, the crex and the bird of night of Minerva, the
crane of Ceres, and some other bird is the messenger of
some other deity. Moreover, those among us that ob-
serve animals, and are nurtured together with them, know
the meaning of their vocal sounds. -The hunter, there-
fore, from the barking of his dog, perceives at one time,
indeed, that the dog explores a hare, but at another, that
the dog has found it; at one time, that he pursues the
game, at another that he has caught it, and at another
that he is in the wrong track, through having lost the
scent of it. Thus, too, the cowherd knows, at one time,
_ indeed, that a cow 1s hungry, or thirsty, or weary, and at
another, that she is incited to venery, or seeks her calf,
[from her different lowings]°. A lion also manifests by
his roarmg that he threatens, a wolf by his howling that
he is in a bad condition, and shepherds, from the bleating
of sheep, know what the sheep want.

6. Neither, therefore, are animals ignorant of the
meaning of the voice of men, when they are angry, or
speak kindly to, or call them, or pursue them, or ask them
to do something, or give something to them; nor, in
short, are they ignorant of any thing that is usually said
to them, but are aptly obedient to it; which it would be
impossible for them to do, unless that which is similar to
intellectton energized, in consequence of being excited by
its similar. The immoderation of their passions, also, is
suppressed by certain modulations, and stags, bulls, and

© The words within the brackets are added from the version of
_ Felicianus. Hence it appears, that the words ἐκ τῶν διαφόρων μυκημάτων
are wanting in the original, after the word 297s, But this defect is not
noticed by any of the editors.

λ

100 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

other animals, from being wild become tame. Those, too,
who are decidedly of opinion that brutes are. deprived of
reason, yet admit that’: dogs have a knowledge of dia-

_ lectic, and make use of the syllogism which consists of

many disjunctive propositions, when, in searching for
their game, they happen to come to a place where there
are three roads. For they thus reason, the beast has
either fled through this road, or through that, or through
the remaining road; but it has not fled either through
this, or through that, and therefore it must have fled
through the remaining third of these roads?. After
which syllogistic process, they resume their pursuit in
that road. It may, however, be readily said, that animals
do these things naturally, because they were not taught
by any one to do them; as if we also were not allotted
reason by nature, though we likewise give names to
things, because we are naturally adapted to do so.
Besides, if it be requisite to believe in Aristotle, animals
are seen to teach their offspring, not only something per-
taining to other things, but also to utter vocal sounds; as »
the nightingale, for instance, teaches her young to sing.
And as he likewise says, animals learn many things from
each other, and many from men; and the truth of what
he asserts is testified by all the’ tamers of colts, by every
jockey, horseman, and charioteer, and by all hunters,
herdsmen, keepers of elephants, and masters of wild beasts
and birds. He, therefore, who estimates things rightly, will
be led, from these instances, to ascribe intelligence to
brutes ; but he who is inconsiderate, and is ignorant of
these things, will be induced to act rashly, through his
inexhaustible avidity co-operating with him against them,
For how is it possible that he should not defame and
calumniate animals, who has determined to cut them in
pieces, as if they were stones? Aristotle, however, Plato,
Empedocles, Pythagoras, Democritus, and all such as

Porphyry derived this from the treatise of Plutarch, in which it is
investigated whether /and are more sagacious than aguatic animals.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 101

endeavoured to discover the truth concerning animals,
have acknowledged that they participate of reason.

7. But it is now requisite to show that brutes have
internal reason. The difference, indeed, between our
reason and theirs, appears to consist, as Aristotle some-
where says, not in essence, but in the more and the less ;
just as many are of opinion, that the difference between
the Gods and us is not essential, but consists in this, that
in them there is a greater, and in us a less accuracy, of
the reasoning power®. And, indeed, so far as pertains to
sense and the remaining organization, according to the
sensoria and the flesh, every one nearly will grant that
these are similarly disposed in us, as they are in brutes.
For they not only similarly participate with us of natural
passions, and the motions produced through these, but
we may also survey in them such affections as are preter-
natural and morbid. No one, however, of a sound mind,
will say that brutes are unreceptive of the reasoning
power, on account of the difference between their habit
of body and ours, when he sees that there is a great
variety of habit in men, according to their race, and the
nations to which they belong, and yet, at the same time,
it is granted that all of them are rational. An ass, there-
fore, is afflicted with a catarrh, and if the disease flows to
his lungs, he dies in the same manner as a man. A horse,
too, 1s subject to purulence, and wastes away through it,
like a man. He is likewise attacked with rigour, the
gout, fever, and fury, in which case he is also said to
have a depressed countenance. A mare, when pregnant,
if she happens to smell a lamp when it is just extin-
guished, becomes abortive, in the same manner as a
woman. An ox, and likewise a camel, are subject to

¢ This was the opinion of the Stoics; but is most erroneous. For
the supreme divinity, being superessential, transcends even intellect itself,
and much more reason, which is an evolved perception of things; and
this is also the case with every other deity, according to the Platonic
theology, when considered according to his hyparxis, or summit. See
my translation of Proclus on the Theology of Plato.

102 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

fever and insanity; a raven becomes scabby, and has
the leprosy; and also a dog, who, besides this, is
afflicted with the gout, and madness: but a hog 15
subject to hoarseness, and in a still greater degree a dog ;
whence this disease in a man is denominated from the
dog, cynanche. And these things are known to us,
because we are familiar with these animals; but of the
diseases of other animals we are ignorant, because we
do not associate with them. Castrated animals also
become more effeminate. Hence cocks, when they are
castrated, no longer crow; but their voice becomes
effeminate, like that of men who lose their testicles. It
is not possible, likewise, to distinguish the bellowing
and horns of a bull, when he is castrated, from those of
acow. But stags, when they are castrated, no longer
cast off their horns, but retain them in the same manner
as eunuchs do their hairs; and if, when they are
castrated, they are without horns, they do not afterwards
produce them, just as it happens to those who, before
they have a beard, are made eunuchs. So that nearly
the bodies of all animals are similarly affected with ours,
with respect to- the bodily calamities to which they are
subject.

8. See, however, whether all the passions of the soul |
in brutes, are not similar to ours; ‘for it is not the pro-
vince of man alone to apprehend juices by the taste,
colours by the sight, odeurs by the smell, sounds by the
hearing, cold or heat, or other tangible objects, by the
touch; but the senses of brutes are capable of the same
perceptions. Nor are brutes deprived of sense because
they are not men, as neither are we to be deprived of
reason, because the Gods, if they possess it, are rational
beings. With respect to the senses, however, other
animals appear greatly to surpass us; for what man can
see so acutely as a dragon? (for this is not the fabulous:
Lynceus). And hence the poets denominate to see’
δρακειν, drakein: but an eagle, from a great height, sees’
a hare. What man hears more acutely than crane’, who,

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 103

are able to hear from an interval so great, as to be
beyond the reach of human sight? And as to smell,
almost all animals so much surpass us in this sense, that
things which fall on it, and are obvious to them, are
concealed from us; so that they know and, smell the
several kinds of animals by their footsteps. Hence, men
employ dogs as their leaders, for the purpose of discover-
ing the retreat of a boar, or a stag. And we, indeed,
are slowly sensible of the coristitution of the air; but
this is immediately perceived by other animals, so that
from them we derive indications of the future state of
the weather. With respect to juices also, they so accu-
rately know the distinction between them, that their
knowledge of what are morbific, salubrious, and dele-
terious among these, surpasses that of physicians. But
Aristotle says, that animals whose sensitive powers are
more exquisite, are more prudent. And the diversities,
indeed, of bodies are capable of producing a facility or
difficulty of being passively affected, and of having reason,
more or less prompt in its energies; but they are not
capable of changing the essence of the soul, since neither
are they able to change the senses, nor to alter the
passions, nor to make them entirely abandon their proper
nature. ‘It must be granted, therefore, that animals
participate more or less of reason, but not that they are
perfectly deprived of it; as neither must it be admitted
that one animal has reason, but another not. As, how-
ever, inone and the same’species of animals, one body is
more, but another less healthy ; and, in a similar manner,
in diseases, in a naturally good, and a naturally bad,
disposition, there is a great difference ; thus also in souls,
one is naturally good, but another depraved: and of
souls that are depraved, one has more, but another less,
of depravity. In good men, likewise, there is not the
same equality; for Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato, are
not similarly good. Nor is there sameness in a concord -
ance of opinions. Hence it does not follow, if we have
more intelligence than other animals, that on this account

104 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

they are to be deprived of intelligence; as neither must
it be said, that partridges do not fly, because hawks fly
higher; nor that other hawks do not fly, because the
bird called phassophonos‘ flies higher than these, and
than all other birds. Some one, therefore, may admit
that the soul is co-passive with the body, and that the
former suffers something from the latter, when the latter
is well or ill affected; but in this case it by no means ~
changes its nature: but if the soul is only co-passive to,
and uses the body as an instrument, she may be able to
effect many things through it, which we cannot, even
when it is organized differently from ours, and when it
is affected in a certain manner, may sympathize with it,
and yet may not change its proper nature.

9. It must be demonstrated, therefore, that there is
a.rational power in animals, and that they are not
deprived of prudence. And in the first place, indeed,
each of them knows whether it is imbecile or strong,
and, in consequence of this, it defends some parts of
itself but attacks with others: Thus the panther uses
its teeth, the lion its nails and teeth, the horse its hoofs,
the ox its horns,-the cock its spurs, and the scorpion its
sting; but the serpents in Egypt use their spittle,
(whence also they are called zruades, ptuades, i. 6. spitters, )
and with this they blind the eyes of those that approach
them: and thus a different animal uses a different part
of itself for attack, in order to save itself. Again, some
animals, viz. such as are robust, feed [and live] remote
from men; but others, who are of an ignoble nature, live
remote from stronger animals, and, on the contrary,
dwell nearer men. And of these, some dwell at a greater
distance: from more robust animals, as sparrows and
swallows, who build their nests in the roofs of houses;
but others associate with men, as, for instance, dogs.
They: likewise change their places of abode at certain

‘ A musket, or male hawk of a small kind. This bird is mentioned
by Homer, Iliad, XIV. v. 238.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 105

times, and know every thing which contributes to their
advantage. Ina similar manner, in fishes and in birds,
a reasoning energy of this kind may be perceived; all
which particulars are abundantly collected by the
ancients, in their writings concerning the prudence of
animals ; and they are copiously discussed by Aristotle,
who says, that by all animals an habitation subservient
to their subsistence and their safety, is most exquisitely
contrived.

10. But he who says that these things are naturally
present with animals, is ignorant in asserting this, that
they are by nature rational; or if this is not admitted,
neither does reason subsist in us naturally, nor with the
perfection of it receive an increase, so far as we are
naturally adapted to receive it. <A divine nature, indeed,
does not become rational* through learning, for there
never was a time in which he was irrational; but ration-
ality is consubsistent with his existence, and he is not
prevented from being rational, because he did not receive
reason through discipline: though, with respect to other
animals, in the same manner as with respect to men,
many things are taught them by nature, and some things
are imparted by discipline. Brutes, however, learn some
things from each other, but are taught others, as we
have said, by men. They also have memory, which 18 ἃ
most principal thing in the resumption of reasoning and
prudence. They likewise have vices, and are envious;
though their bad qualities are not so widely extended as
‘in men: for their vices are of a lighter nature than
those of men. This, indeed, 15 evident; for the builder
of a house will never be able to lay the foundation of it, —
unless he is sober; nor can a shipwright properly place

s Reason in a divine intellect subsists causally, or in a way better
than reason, and therefore is not a discursive energy (διεξοδικη svegyeia),
but an evolved cause of things. And though, in a divine soul, it is
discursive, or transitive, yet it differs from our reason in this, that it
perceives the whole of one form at once, and not by degrees, as we ‘do
when we reason.

106 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

the keel of a ship, unless he is in health; nor a husband-
man plant a vine, unless he applies his mind to it; yet
nearly all men, when they are intoxicated, can beget
children. This, however, is not the case with other
animals; for they propagate for the sake of offspring, and
for the most part, when the males have made the female
pregnant, they no longer attempt to be connected with
her; nor, if they should attempt it, would the female
permit them. But the magnitude of the lascivious inso-
lence and intemperance of men in these things, is
evident. In other animals, however, the male is conscious
of the parturient throes of the female, and, for the most
part, partakes of the same pains; as is evident in cocks.
But others mcubate together with the females; as the
males of doves. They likewise provide a proper place
for the delivery of their offspring; and after they have
brought forth their offspring, they both purify them and
themselves. And he who properly observes, will see
that every thing proceeds with them in an orderly
manner; that they fawn on him who nourishes them,
and that they know their master, and give indications of
him who acts insidiously.

11. Who likewise is ignorant how much gregarious
animals preserve justice towards each other? for this is
preserved by ants, by bees, and by other animals of the
like kind.. And who is ignorant of the chastity of female
ring-doves towards the males with whom they associate ?
for they destroy those who are found by them to have
committed adultery. Or who has not heard of the
justice of storks towards their parents? For in the
several species of animals, a peculiar virtue is eminent,
to which each species is naturally adapted; nor because
this virtue is natural and stable, is it fit to deny that they
are rational? For it might be requisite to deprive them
of rationality, if their works were not the proper effects
of virtue and rational sagacity ; but if we do not, under-
stang how these works are effected, because we are
unable to penetrate into the reasoning which they use,

-

ANIMAL FOOD.-—BOOK III. 107

we are not on this account to accuse them of irrationality ;
for neither is any one able to penetrate into the intel-
lect of that divinity the sun, but from his works we assent
to those who demonstrate him to be an intellectual and
rational essence.

12. But some one may very properly wonder at
those who admit that justice derives its subsistence from
the rational part, and who call those animals that have
no association with men, savage and unjust, and yet do
not extend justice as far as to those that do associate
with us; and which, in the same manner as men, would
be deprived of life, if they were deprived of human
society, Birds, therefore, and dogs, and many quadru-
peds, such as goats, horses, sheep, asses, and mules,
would perish, if deprived of an association with mankind.
Nature also, the fabricator of their frame, constituted
them so as to be in want of men, and fashioned men so
as to require their assistance; thus producing an innate
justice in them towards us, and in us towards them.
But it is not at all wonderful, if some of them are savage
towards men; for what Aristotle says is true, that if all
animals had an abundance of nutriment, they would not
act ferociously, either towards each other, or towards
men. For on account of food, though necessary and
slender, enmities and friendships are produced among
animals, and also on account of the places which they
occupy; but if men were reduced to such straits as
brutes are [with respect to food,] how much more savage
‘would they become than those animals that appear to be
wild? War and famine are indications of the truth of
this; for then men do not abstain from eating each
other; and even without war and famine, they eat
animals that are nurtured with them, and are perfectly
tame.

13. Some one, however, may say, that brutes are
indeed rational animals, but have not a certain habitude,
proximity, or alliance to us; but he who asserts thig will,
in the first place, make them to be irrational animals, in

108 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

consequence of depriving them of an alliance to our
nature. And, in the next place, he will make their
association with us to depend on the utility which we
derive from them, and not on the participation of reason.
The thing proposed by us, however, is to show that
brutes are rational animals, and not to inquire whether
there is any compact between them and us. For, with
respect to men, all of them do not league with us,
and yet no one would say, that he who does not enter
into a league with us is irrational. But many brutes are
slaves to men, and, as some one rightly says, though they
are in a state of servitude themselves, through the impro-
bity of men, yet, at the same time, by wisdom and justice,
they cause their masters to be their servants and curators.
Moreover, the vices of brutes are manifest, from which
especially their rationality is demonstrated. For . they
are envious, and the males are rivals of each other with
respect to the favour of the females, and the females with
respect to the regard of the males. There is one vice,.
however, which is not inherent in them, viz. acting insi-
diously towards their benefactors, but they are perfectly
benevolent to those wha are kind to them, and place
so much confidence in them, as to. follow whereyer they
may lead them, though it should even be to slaughter. and
manifest danger. And though someone should nourish
them, not for their sake, but for his own, yet they will be
benevolently disposed towards their possessor. But men
[on the contrary] do not act with such hostility towards
any one, as towards him who has nourished them ; nor do
they so much pray for the death of any one, as for
his death.

14. Indeed, the operations of brutes are attended with
so much consideration, that they frequently perceive,
that the food which is placed for them is nothing else

h Tn the original, Ovrw δ᾽ sch λογιστικα ov dea, ¥.7.A. But for λογιστικα,
Lipsius proposes to read, λογιια, and Meerman Acyixn, There is, how-
ever, no occasion whatever to substitute any other word for λογιστικα, as,
with Platonic writers, τὸ Acyterinev is equivalent. to τὸ λογιζόμενον.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 109

than a snare, though, either through mtemperance or
hunger, they approach to it. And some of them, indeed,
do not approach to it immediately, but others slowly
accede to it. They also try whether it is possible to take
the food without falling into danger, and frequently in
consequence of rationality vanquishing passion, they de-
part. without being injured. Some of them too revile at,
and discharge their urine on the stratagem of men; but
others, through voracity, though they know that they
shall be captured, yet no less than the associates of
Ulysses, suffer themselves to die rather than not eat.
Some persons, likewise, have not badly endeavoured to
show .from the places which animals are allotted, that
they are far more prudent than we are. . For as those
beings that dwell in ether are rational, so also, say they,
are the animals which occupy the region proximate to
sether, viz. the air; afterwards aquatic animals differ. from
these, and in the last place, the terrestrial differ from
the aquatic [in degrees of rationality]. And we belong
to the class of terrene animals dwelling in the sediment of
the universe. For in the Gods, we must not infer that
they possess a greater degree of excellence from the
places [which they illuminate], though in mortal natures:
this may be admitted.

15. Since, also, brutes acquire a knowledge of the arts,
and these such as are human, and learn to dance, to
drive a chariot, to fight a duel, to walk on ropes, to write
and read, to play on the pipe and the harp, to discharge
arrows, and to ride,—this being the case, can you
any longer doubt whether they possess that power which
is receptive of art, since the recipient of these arts may be
seen to exist in them? For where will they receive them,
unless reason is inherent in them in which the arts sub-
sist? For they do not hear our voice as if it was a mere
sound only, but they also perceive the difference in the
meaning of the words, which is the effect of rational
intelligence. But our opponents say, that animals per-
form badly what is done by men. To this we reply, that

110 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

neither do men perform all things well. For if ‘this
be not admitted, some men would be in vain victors in
a contest, and others vanquished. They add, that brutes
do not consult, nor form assemblies, nor act in a judicial
capacity. But tell me whether all men do this? Do not
actions in the multitude precede consultation? And
whence can any one demonstrate that brutes do not con-
sult? For no one can adduce an argument sufficient
to prove that they do not. But those show the contrary
to this, who have written minutely about animals. As to
other objections, which are adduced by aur adversaries in
a declamatory way, they are perfectly frivolous; such,
for instance, as that brutes have no cities of their own.
For neither have the Scythians, who live in carts,
nor the Gods. Our opponents add, that neither have
brutes any written laws. To this we reply, that neither
had men while they were happy. For Apis is said: to
have been the first that promulgated laws for the Greeks,
when they were in want of them.

16. To men, therefore, on account of their voracity,
brutes do not appear to possess reason ; but by the Gods
and divine men, they are honoured equally with sacred
suppliants. Hence, the God‘ said to Aristodicus, the
Cumean, that sparrows were his suppliants. Socrates
also, and prior to him, Rhadamanthus, swore by animals.
But the Egyptians conceive them to be Gods, whether
they, in reality, thought them to be so, or whether
they intentionally represented the Gods in the forms
of oxen, birds, and other animals, in order that these
animals might be no less abstained from than from men,
or whether they did this through other more mystical
causes‘. Thus also the Greeks united a ram to the

i See the first book of Herodotus, chap. 159.

k The more mystical cause why the Egyptians worshipped animals,
appears to me to be this, that they conceived a living to be preferable to
an inanimate image of divinity. Hence, they reverenced animals as
visible and living resemblances of certain invisible powers of .the Gods.
~~ See Plutarch’s Treatise on Isis and Osiris.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 111

statue of Jupiter, but the horns of a bull to that of
Bacchus. They likewise fashioned the statue of Pan
from the form of a man and a goat; but they represented
the Muses and the Sirens winged, and also Victory, Iris,
Love, and Hermes. Pindar too, in his hymns, represents
the Gods, when they were expelled by Typhon, not
resembling men, but other animals. And Jupiter, when
in love with Pasiphae, is said to have become a bull; but
at another time, he is said to have been changed into an
eagle and a swan; through all which the ancients indi-
cated the honour which they paid to animals, and this in
a still greater degree when they assert that Jupiter was
nursed by a goat. The Cretans, from a law established
by Rhadamanthus, swore by all animals. Nor was
Socrates in jest when he swore by the dog and the goose;
but in so doing, he swore conformably to the just son
of Jupiter [Rhadamanthus]; nor did he sportfully say
that swans were his fellow-servants. But fables ob-
scurely signify, that animals have souls similar to ours,
when they say that the Gods in their anger changed men
into brutes, and that, when they were so changed, they
afterwards pitied and loved them. For things of this
kind are asserted of dolphins and halcyons, of night-
ingales and swallows.

17. Each of the ancients, likewise, who had been
prosperously nursed by animals, boasted more of this
than of their parents and educators. Thus, one boasted
of having been nursed by a she-wolf, another by a hind,
another by a she-goat, and another by a bee. But Semi-
ramis gloried in having been brought up by doves, Cyrus
in being nursed by a dog, and a Thracian in having a swan
for his nurse, who likewise bore the name of his nurse.
Hence also, the Gods obtained their surnames, as
Bacchus that of Hinnuleus, Apollo that of Lyceus, and, like-
wise Delphinius, Neptune and Minerva that of Equestris.
But Hecate, when invoked by the names of a bull, a dog,
and a lioness, is more propitious. If, however, those who
sacrifice animals and eat them, assert that they are irra-

112 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

tional, in order that they may mitigate the crime of
so doing, the Scythians also, who eat their parents, may
in like manner say that their parents are destitute of
reason. .

18. Through these arguments, therefore, and others
which we shall afterwards mention, in narrating the
opinions of the ancients, it 1s demonstrated that brutes
are rational animals, reason in most of them being indeed
imperfect, of which, nevertheless, they are not entirely
deprived. Since, however, justice pertains to rational
beings, as our opponents say, how is it possible not to
admit, that we should also act justly towards brutes? For
we do not extend justice to plants, because there appears
to be much in them which is unconnected with reason ;
though of these, we are accustomed to use the fruits, but
not together with the fruits to cut off the trunks. We
collect, however, corn and leguminous substances, when,
being efflorescent, they have fallen on the earth, and are
dead. But no one uses for food the flesh of dead. animals,
that of fish being excepted, unless they have been de-
stroyed by violence. So that in these things there
is much injustice. As Plutarch also says', it does not
follow that, because our nature is indigent of certain
things, and we use these, we should therefore act unjustly
towards all things. For we are allowed to injure .other
things to a certain extent, in-order to procure the neces-
sary means of subsistence (if to take any thing from
plants, even while they are living, is an injury to them) ;
but to destroy other things through luxury, and for. the
enjoyment of pleasure, is perfectly .savage and unjust.
And the abstinence from these neither diminishes our
life nor our living happily. For if, indeed, the destruc-
tion of animals and the eating of flesh were as requisite
as air and water, plants and fruits, without which it
is impossible to live, this injustice would be necessarily |
connected with our nature. But if many priests of the

δ See the Symposiacs of Plutarch, lib. ix. 8.

ANIMAL FOOD.— BOOK III. LIS

Gods, and many kings of the barbarians, being attentive
to purity, and if, likewise, infinite species of animals
never taste food of this kind, yet live, and obtain their
proper end according to nature, is not he absurd who
orders us, because we are compelled to wage war with
certain animals, not to live peaceably with those with
whom it is possible to do so, but thinks, either that we
ought to live without exercising justice towards any
thing, or that, by exercising it ‘towards all things, we
should not continue in existence? As, therefore, among
men, he who, for the sake of his own safety, or that of his
children or country, either seizes the wealth of certain
persons, or oppresses some region or city, has necessity
for the pretext of his injustice; but he who acts in
this manner through the acquisition of wealth, or through
satiety or luxurious pleasure, and for the purpose of
satisfying desires which are not necessary, appears to
be inhospitable, intemperate, and depraved ;— thus too,
divinity pardons the injuries which are done to plants,
the consumption of fire and water, the shearing of sheep,
the milking of cows, and the taming of oxen, and subju-
gating them to the yoke, for the safety and continuance
in life of those that use them. But to deliver animals
to be slaughtered and cooked, and thus be filled with
murder, not for the sake of nutriment and satisfying the
wants of nature, but making pleasure and gluttony the
end of such conduct, is transcendently iniquitous and
dire. For it is sufficient that we use, for laborious pur-
poses, though they have no occasion to labour them-
selves, the progeny of horses, and asses, and bulls, as
‘Eschylus says, as our substitutes, who, by being tamed
and subjugated to the yoke, alleviate our toil.

19. But with respect to him who thinks that we
should not use an ox for food, nor destroying and
corrupting spirit and life, place things on the table which
are only the allurements and elegancies of satiety, of
what does he deprive our life, which is either necessary
to our safety, or subservient to virtue? To compare

I

114 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

plants, however, with animals, is doing violence to the
order of things. For the latter are naturally sensitive,
and. adapted to feel pain, to be terrified and hurt; on
which account also they may be mjured. But the former
are entirely destitute of sensation, and in consequence of
this, nothing foreign, or evil, or hurtful, or injurious, can
befall them. For sensation is the principle of all alliance,
and of every thing of a foreign nature. But Zeno and his
followers. assert, that alliance is the principle of justice.
_ And is it not absurd, since we see that many of out own
species live from sense alone, but do not possess intellect
and reason, and since we also see, that many of them sur-
pass the most terrible of wild beasts in cruelty, anger,
and rapine, being murderous of their children and their
parents, and also being tyrants, and the tools of kings [is
it not, I say, absurd,] to fancy that we ought to act justly
towards these, but that no justice is due from us to the
ox that ploughs, the dog that is fed with us, and the
animals that nourish us with their milk, and adorn our
bodies with their wool? Is not such an opinion most irra-
tional and absurd ?

20. But, hy Jupiter, the assertion of Chrysippus is
considered by our opponents to be very probable, that
the Gods made us for the sake of themselves, and for the
sake of each other, and that they made animals for
the sake of us; horses, indeed, in order that they might
assist us in battle, dogs, that they might hunt with us,
and leopards, bears, and lions, for the sake of exercising
our fortitude. But the hog (for here the pleasantry
of Chrysippus is most delightful) was not made for,
any other purpose than to be sacrificed ; and God mingled
soul, as if it were salt, with the flesh of this animal, that
he might procure for us excellent food. In order, like-
wise, that we might have an abundance of broth, and
luxurious suppers, divinity provided for us all-various
kinds of shell-fish, the fishes called purples, sea-nettles,
and the various kinds of winged animals; and this not
from a certain other cause, but only that he might supply

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. « 115

man with an exuberance of pleasure ; in 80 doing, sur-
passing all nurses [in kindness], and thickly filling with
pleasures and enjoyments the terrestrial place. Let him,
however, to whom these assertions appear to possess
a certain probability, and to participate of something
worthy of deity, consider what he will reply to the saying
of Carneades, that every thing which is produced by
nature, is benefited when it obtains the end to which it is
adapted, and for which it was generated. But benefit
is to be understood in a more general way, as signifying
what the Stoics call useful. The hog, however, [says he]
was produced by nature for the purpose of being slaugh-
tered and used for food; and when it suffers this, it
obtains the end for which it is adapted, and is benefited.
But if.God fashioned animals for the use of men, ii what
do we use flies, lice, bats, beetles, scorpions, and vipers? |
of which some are odious to the sight, defile the tquch,
are intolerable to the smell, and in their voice dire
and unpleasant; and others, on the contrary, are destruc-
tive to those that meet with them. And with respect to
the balena, pistrices, and other species of whales, an infi-
nite number of which, as Homer says", the loud-sounding
Amphitrite nourishes, does not the Demiurgus teach us,
that they were generated for the utility of the nature of
things"? And if our opponents should admit. that all
things were not generated for us, and with a view to our
advantage, in addition to the distinction which they make
being very confused and obscure, we shall not avoid
acting unjustly, in attacking and noxiously using those
animals which were not produced for our sake, but
according to nature [ἡ. 6. for the sake of the universe], as
we were. I omit to mention, that if we define, by utility,

m™ Odyss. XII. v. 96.

" The latter part of this sentence, which in the original is τι ove
ἐδιδαξεν nag o δημιουργος ὁπὴ χρησιμα τὴ φύσει γέγονε. Valentinius most erro-
neously translates, ‘‘ quare nos rerum opifex non edocuit, quomodo a
natura in nostros usus facta fuerint ?”

116 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

things which pertain to us, we shall not be prevented
from admitting, that we were generated for the sake
of the most destructive animals, such as crocodiles,
balene, and dragons. For we are not in the least
benefited by them; but they seize and destroy men that
fall in their way, and use them for food; in so doing
acting not at all mrore cruelly than we do, excepting that
they commit this injustice through want and hunger, but
we through insolent wantonness, and for the sake of
luxury, frequently sporting im theatres, and in hunting
slaughter the greater part of animals. And by thus
acting, indeed, a murderous disposition and a brutal
nature become strengthened in us, and render us insen-
sible to pity : to which we may add, that those who first
dared to do this, blunted the greatest part of lenity, and
rendered it inefficacious. The Pythagoreans, however,
made lenity towards beasts to be an exercise of philan-
thropy and commiseration. So that, how is it possible
they should not in a greater degree excite us to justice,
than those who assert that, by not slaughtering animals,
the justice which is usually exercised towards men will be
corrupted? For custom is most powerful in increasing
those passions in man which were gradually introduced
into his nature.

21. It is so, say our antagonists; but as the immortal
1s opposed to the mortal, the incorruptible to the cor-
ruptible, and. the incorporeal to the corporeal, so to the
rational essence which has an existence in the nature of
things, the irrational essence must be opposed, which has
a subsistence contrary to it; nor in so many conjugations
of things, is this alone to be left imperfect and mutilated.
[Our opponents, however, thus speak], as if we did not
grant this, or as if we had not shown that there is much
of the irrational among beings. For there is an abundance
of it in all the natures that are destitute of soul, nor do
we require any other opposition to that which is rational ;
but immediately every thing which is deprived of soul,

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 117

being irrational and without intellect, is opposed to that.
which possesses reason and dianoia°®. If, however, some
one should think fit to assert that not nature in common,
but the animated nature, is divided into that which pos-
sesses and that which is without imagination, and into
that which is sensitive, and that which is deprived of
sensation, in order that these oppositions of habits and
privations may subsist about the same genus, as being
equiponderant ; — he who says this speaks absurdly. For
it would be absurd to investigate in the animated nature
that which is sensitive, and that which is without sen-
sation, that which employs, and that which is without,
imagination, because every thing animated is immediately
adapted to be sensitive and imaginative. So that neither
thus will he justly require, that one part of the animated
nature should be rational, but another irrational, when he
is speaking to men, who think that nothing participates
of sense which does not also participate of intelligence,
and that nothing is an animal in which opinion and
reasoning are not inherent, in the same manner as with
animals every sense and impulse are naturally present.
For nature, which they rightly assert produced all things
for the sake of a certain thing, and with reference to
a certain end, did not make an animal sensitive merely
that it might be passively affected, and possess sensible
perception; but as there are many things which are allied
and appropriate, and many which are foreign to it, it
would not be able to exist for the shortest space of time,
unless it learnt how to avoid some things, and to pursue
others. The knowledge, therefore, of both these, sense
similarly imparts to every animal; but the apprehension
and pursuit of what is useful, and the depulsion and
avoidance of what is destructive and painful, can by no
possible contrivance be present with those animals that
are incapable of reasoning, judging, and remembering,
and that do not naturally possess an animadversive power.

ο i.e. The discursive energy of reason.

118 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

For to those animals from whom you entirely take away
expectation, memory, design, preparation, hope, fear,
desire, and indignation, neither the eyes when present,
nor the ears, nor sense, nor phantasy, will be beneficial,
since they will be of no use; and it will be better to be
deprived of them than to labour, be in pain, and be
afflicted, without possessing the power of repelling these
molestations. There is, however, a treatise of Strato, the
physiologist, in which it is demonstrated, that it is not
possible to have a sensible perception of any thing with-
out the energy of intellection, For frequently the letters
of a book, which we cursorily consider by the sight, and
words which fall on the auditory sense, are concealed
from and escape us, when our intellect is attentive to
other things ; but afterwards, when it returns to the thing
to which it was before inattentive, then, by recollection,
it runs through and pursues each of the before-mentioned
particulars. Hence also it is said [by Epicharmus], —

’Tis mind alone that sees and hears,
And all besides is deaf and blind.

For the objects which fall on the eyes and the ears do
not produce a sensible perception of themselves, unless
that which is intellective is present. On which account,
also, king Cleomenes, when something that was recited was
applauded, being asked, if it did not also appear to him to
be excellent, left this to the decision of those that asked
him the question; for he said, that his intellect was at
the time in Peloponnesus. Hence it is: necessary that
intellect should be present with all those with whom
sensible perception is present. _

22. Let us, however, admit that sense does not require
intellect for the accomplishment of its proper work, yet,
when energizing about what is appropriate and what is
foreign, it discerns the difference between the two, it
must then exercise the power of memory, and must dread
that which will produce pain, desire that which will be
beneficial, and contrive, if it is absent, how it may be

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK {ε1. 119

present, aad will procure methods of pursuing and in-
vestigating what is advantageous, and of avoiding and
flying from hostile occurrences. Indeed, our opponents,
in their Introductions, [as they call them], every where
inculcate these things with a tedious prolixity, defining
design to be an indication of perfection ; the tendency of
intellect to the object of its perception, an impulse prior
to impulse; preparation, an action prior to action; and
memory, the comprehension of some past thing’, the
perception of which, when present, was. obtained through
sense. For there is not any one of these which is not
rational, and all of them are present with all animals.
Thus, too, with respect to intellections, those which are
reposited in the mind, are called by them swat, notzons ;
but when they are in motion [through a discursive
energy] they denominate them διανοησεις, or percepteons
obtained by a reasoning process. But with respect to all
the passions, as they are in common acknowledged to be
depraved natures and opinions, it is wonderful that our
opponents should overlook the operations and motions
of brutes,,many of which are the effects of anger, many
of fear, and, by Jupiter, of envy also and emulation.
Our opponents, too, themselves punish dogs and horses
when they do wrong; and this not in vain, but in order
to make them better, producing in them, through the
pain, a sorrow which we denominate repentance. But
the name of the pleasure which is received through the
ears is κηλησις, ὃ. €. an ear-alluring sweetness; and the
delight which is received through the eyes is denominated
youteia, t. 6. enchantment. Each of these, however, is
used towards brutes. Hence stags and horses are allured
by the harmony produced from reeds and flutes; and the

P In the original, μνημὺν δὲ κατάληψιν ἀξιωμώτος παφεληλυθος, ob τὸ παρὸν εξ
αἰσθησεως κατεληφθη. but for αἀξιωματος, I read πραγμάτος. Felicianus also
appears to have found this reading in his manuscript copy of this work ;
fur his version of the passage is, “ vel memoriam rei preterit compre-
hensionem, quam presentem sensus perciperat.”

120 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

crabs, called zayouga, paguri, are evocated from their
caverns by the melody of reeds. The fish thrissa, like-
wise, is said through harmony to come forth from its
retreats. Those, however, who speak stupidly about
these things, assert that animals are neither delighted,
nor enraged, nor terrified, nor make any provision for
what is necessary, nor remember ; but they say that the
bee ast were remembers, that the swallow as it were pro-
vides what is requisite, that the lion is as it were angry,
and that the stag is as ἐξ were afraid. And I know not
what answer to give to those who say ‘that animals
neither see nor hear, but see as tt were, and as it were
hear; that they do not utter vocal sounds, but as ἐΐ were
utter them ; and that, in short, they do not live, but as 7t
were live. For he who is truly intelligent, will readily
admit that these assertions are no more sane than the
former, and are similarly destitute of evidence. When,
however, on comparing with human manners and lives,
actions, and modes of living, those of animals, I see
much depravity in the latter, and no manifest tendency to
virtue as to the principal end, nor any proficiency, or
appetition of proficiency, I am dubious why nature gave
.the beginning of perfection to those that are never able
to arrive at the end of it’. But this to our opponents
does not appear to be at all absurd. For as they admit
that the love of parents towards their offspring is the
principle in us of association and justice; yet, though
they perceive that this affection is abundant and strong
in animals, they nevertheless deny that they participate
of justice; which assertion is similarly defective with the
nature of mules, who, though they are not in want of any
generative member, since they have a penis and vulva,

4 This doubt may, perhaps, be solved, by admitting that brutes have
an imperfect rationality, or the very dregs of the rational faculty, by
which they form a link between men and zoophytes, just as zoophytes are
a link between brutes and merely vegetable substances. Brutes, there-
fore, having an imperfect reason, possess only the beginning of per-
fection,

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 13!

and receive pleasure from employing these parts, yet
they are not able to accomplish the end of generation.
Consider the thing, too, in another way: Is it not ridi-
culous to say that such men as Socrates, Plato, and Zeno,
were not less vicious than any slave, but resembled slaves
in stupidity, intemperance, and injustice, and afterwards
blame the nature of brutes, as neither pure, nor formed
with sufficient accuracy for the attainment of virtue; thus
attributing to them a privation, ahd not a depravity and
imbecility of reason? Especially since they acknowledge
that there is a vice of the rational part of the soul, with
which every brute is replete. For we may perceive that
timidity, intemperance, injustice, and malevolence, are
inherent in many brutes.

23. But he who thinks that the nature which is not
adapted to receive rectitude of reason, does not at all
receive reason, he, in the first place, does not differ from
one who fancies that an ape does not naturally parti-
cipate of deformity, nor a tortoise of tardity; because the
former is not receptive of beauty, nor the latter of celerity.
And, in the next place, this is the opinion of one who
does not perceive the obvious difference of things. For
reason, indeed, is ingenerated by nature; but right and
perfect reason is acquired by study and discipline. Hence
all animated beings participate of reason, but our oppo-
nents cannot mention any man who possesses rectitude
of reason and wisdom [naturally], though the multitude
of men is innumerable. But as the sight of one animal
differs from that of another, and the flying of one bird
from that of another, (for hawks and grasshoppers do not
similarly see, nor eagles and partridges); thus, also,
neither does every thing which participates of reason
possess genius and acuteness in the highest perfection.
Indeed there are many indications in brutes of asso-
ciation, fortitude, and craft, in procuring what is neces-
sary, and in economical conduct; as, on the contrary,
there are also indications in them of injustice, timidity,
and fatuity. Hence it is a question with .some, which

192 - ON ABSTINENCE FROM

are the more excellent, terrestrial or aquatic animals‘?
And that there are these indications, is evident from
comparing storks with river horses: for the former
nourish, but the latter destroy their fathers, in order that
they may have connexion with their mothers. This is
likewise seen on comparing doves with partridges: for
the latter conceal and destroy their eggs, if the female,
during her incubation, refuses to be connected with
the male. But doves successively relieve each other in
incubation, alternately cherishing the eggs; and first,
indeed, they feed the young, and afterwards the male
strikes the female with his beak, and drives her to the
eggs and her young, if she has for a long time wandered
from them. Antipater, however, when he blames asses
and sheep for the neglect of purity, overlooks, I know not
how, lynxes and swallows; of which, the former remove
and entirely conceal and bury their excrement, but the
latter teach their young to throw it out of their nest.
Moreover, we do not say that one tree is more ignorant
than another, as we say that a sheep is more stupid than
a dog. Nor do we say that one herb is more timid than
another, as we do that a stag is more timid than a lion.
For, as in things which are immoveable, one is not slower
than another, and in things which are not vocal, one is
not less vocal than another: thus, too, in all things in
which the power of intellection is wanting, one thing can-
not be said to be more timid, more dull, or more intem-
perate than another. For, as these qualitiés are present
differently in their different participants, they produce in
animals the diversities which we perceive. Nor is it
wonderful that man should so much excel other animals
in docility, sagacity, justice, and association. For many
brutes surpass all men in magnitude of body, and celerity
of foot, and likewise in strength of sight, and accuracy of
hearing; yet man is not on this account either deaf, or
blind, or powerless. But we run, though slower than

* Plutarch has written a most ingenious treatise on this subject.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 123

stags, and we see, though not so accurately as hawks;
and nature has not deprived us of strength and magm-
tude, though our possession of these is nothing, when
compared with the strength and bulk of the elephant and
the camel. Hence, in a similar manner, we must not say
that brutes, because their intellection is more dull than ours,
and because they reason worse than we do, neither energize
discursively, nor, in short, possess tntellectton and reason ; but
it must be admitted that they possess these, though in an
imbecile and turbid manner, just as a dull and disordered eye
participates of sight.

24. Innumerable instances, however; might be ad-
duced in proof of the natural sagacity of animals, if many
things of this kind had not by many persons been col-
lected and narrated. But this subject must be still further
considered. For it appears that it belongs to the same
thing, whether it be a part or a power, which is naturally
adapted to receive a certain thing, to be also disposed to
fall into a preternatural mode of subsistence, when it
becomes mutilated or diseased. Thus, the eye is adapted
to fall into blindness, the leg into lameness, and the
tongue into stammering; but nothing else is subject to
such defects. For blindness does not befall that which is
not naturally adapted to see, nor lameness that which is
not adapted to walk; nor is that which is deprived of a
tongue fitted to stammer, or lisp, or be dumb. Hence,
neither can that animal be delirious, or stupid, or insane,’
in which intellection, and the discursive energy of reason,
are not naturally inherent.. For it is not possible for any
thing to be passively affected which does not possess
a power, the passion of which is either privation, or muti-
lation, or some other deprivation. Moreover, I have
met with mad dogs, and also rabid horses; and some
persons assert that oxen and foxes become mad. The
example of dogs, however, is sufficient for our purpose:
for it is a thing indubitable, and testifies that the animal
possesses no despicable portion of reason and discursive
energy, the passion of which, when disturbed and con-

124 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

founded, is fury and madness. For, when they are thus
affected, we do not see that there is any change in the
quality of their sight or hearing. But as he is absurd
who denies that a man is beside himself, and that his
intellectual, reasoning, and recollective powers, are cor-
rupted, when he is afflicted with melancholy or delirium,
(for it is usually said of those that are insane, that they
are not themselves, but have fallen off from reason):
thus, also, he who thinks that mad dogs suffer any thing
else than that of having the power, which is naturally
. intellective, and is adapted to reason and recollect, full of
tumult and distortion, so. as to cause them to be ignorant
of persons most dear to them, and abandon their accus-
tomed mode of living;—he who thus thinks, appears
either to overlook what is obvious; or, if he really per-
ceives what takes place, voluntarily contends against the
truth. And such are the arguments adduced by Plutarch
in many of his treatises against the Stoics and Peri-
patetics.

25. But Theophrastus employs the following reason-
ing :— Those that are generated from the same sources, ἡ
I mean from the same father and mother, are said by us
to be naturally allied to each other. And moreover, we
likewise conceive that those who derive their origin from
the same ancestors that we do, are allied to us, and also
that this is the case with our fellow-citizens, because they
participate with us of the same land, and are united to us
by the bonds of association. For we do not think that
the latter are allied to each other, and to us, through
deriving their origin from the same ancestors, unless it
should so happen that the first progenitors of these were
_ the sources of our race, or were derived from the same
ancestors. Hence I think we should say, that Greek is
allied and has an affinity to Greek, and Barbarian to Bar-
barian, and all men to each other; for one of these two
reasons, either because they originate from the same
ancestors, or because they participate of the same food,
manners, and genus. Thus also we must admit that all

΄

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 125

men have an affinity, and are allied to each other. And,
moreover, the principles of the bodies of all animals are
naturally the same. I do not say this with reference to
the first elements of their bodies; for plants also consist
of these; but I mean the seed, the flesh, and the con-
nascent genus of humours which is inherent in animals.
But animals are much more allied to each other, through
naturally possessing souls, which are not different from
each other, I mean in desire and anger; and besides
these, in the reasoning faculty, and, above all, in the
senses. But as with respect to bodies, so likewise with
respect to souls, some animals have them more, but others
less perfect, yet all of them have naturally the same prin-
ciples. And this is evident from the affinity of their
passions. If, however, what we have said is true, viz.
that such is the generation of the manners of animals, all
the tribes of them are indeed intellective, but they differ
in their modes of living, and in the temperature of the

first elements of which they consist. And if this be
admitted, the genus of other animals has an affinity, and
is allied to us, For, as Euripides says, they have all of
them the same food and the same spirit, the same purple
streams; and they likewise demonstrate that the common
parents of all of them are Heaven and Earth.

26. Hence, since animals are allied to us, if it should
appear, according to Pythagoras, that they are allotted
the same soul that we are, he may justly be considered
as impious who does not abstain from ac‘.ag unjustly
towards his kindred. Nor because some animals are
savage, 1s their alliance to us to be on this account
abscinded. For some men may be found who are no
less, and even more malefic than savage animals to their
neighbours, and who are impelled to injure any one they
may meet with, as if they were driven by a certain blast
of their own nature and depravity. Hence also, we
destroy such men; yet we do not cut them off from
an alliance to animals of a mild nature. Thus, therefore,
if likewise some animals are savage, these, as such, are to

-

126 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

be destroyed, in the same manner as men that are savage ;
but our habitude or alliance to other and wilder animals
is not on this account to be abandoned. JBut neither
tame nor savage animals are to be eaten; as neither
are unjust men. Now, however, we act most unjustly,
destroying, indeed, tame animals, because some brutes
are savage and unjust, and feeding on such as are tame.
With respect to tame animals, however, we act with
a twofold injustice, because, though they are tame, we
slay them, and also, because we eat them. And, in short,
the death of these has a reference to the assumption
of them for food. |

To these, also, such arguments as the following may
be added. For he. who says that the man who extends
the just as far as to brutes, corrupts the just, is ignorant
that he does not himself preserve justice, but increases
pleasure, which is hostile to justice. By admitting, there-
fore, that pleasure is the end [of our actions], justice
is evidently destroyed. For to whom is it not manifest
that justice is increased through abstinence? For he who
abstains from every thing animated, though he may
abstain from such animals as do not contribute to the
benefit of society, will be much more careful not to injure
those of his own species. For he who loves the genus,
will not hate any species of animals; and by how much
the greater his love of the genus is*, by so much the
more will he preserve justice towards a part of the genus,
and that to which he is allied. He, therefore, who admits
that he is allied to all animals, will not injure any animal.
But he who confines justice to man alone, is prepared,
like one enclosed in ἃ narrow space, to hurl from him the
prohibition of injustice. So that the Pythagorean is
more pleasing than the Socratic banquet. For Socrates

* In the original, oom pesiov τὸ γένος τὸ τῶν ζωων, τοσουτῳ καὶ argos τὸ μέρος
και τὸ οἰκξίον ταυτὴν διασωσει. On this passage, Reisk observes, “‘ Forte
cow paeilan ἡ οικειωσις argos To γέγος τὸ Τῶν ζωων, τοσουτω (scilicet μιαλλον) καὶ προς
τὸ μερός, κοτιλ." But, instead of » οἰκείωσις, it appears to me that " φιλία
should be substituted. |

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 127.

said, that hunger is the sauce of food; but Pythagoras
said, that to injure no one, and to be exhilarated with jus-
tice, is the sweetest sauce; as the avoidance of animal
food, will also be the avoidance of unjust conduct with
respect to food. For God has.not so constituted things,
that we cannot preserve ourselves without injuring others ;
since, if this were the case, he would have connected us
‘with a nature which is the principle of injustice. Do not
they, however, appear to be ignorant of the peculiarity of
justice, who think that it was introduced from the
. alliance of men to each other? For. this will be nothing
more than a certain philanthropy ; but justice consists in
abstaining from injuring any thing which is not noxious.
And our conception of the just man must be formed
according to the latter, and not according to the former
mode. Hence, therefore, since justice consists in not
injuring any thing, it must be extended as far as to every
animated nature. On this account, also, the essence
of justice consists in the rational ruling over the irrational,
and in the irrational being obedient to the rational part.
For when reason governs, and the irrational part is obe-
dient to its mandates, it follows, by the greatest necessity,
that man will be innoxious towards every thing. For the
passions being restrained, and desire and anger wasting
away, but reason possessing its proper empire, a simi-
litude to a more excellent nature [and to deity] imme-
diately follows. But the more excellent nature in the
universe 1s entirely innoxious, and, through possessing
a power which preserves and benefits all things, 15 itself
not in want of any thing. We, however, through justice
[when we exercise it], are innoxious towards all things,
but, through being connected with mortality, are indigent
of things of a necessary nature. But the assumption
of what is necessary, does not injure even plants, when
we take what they cast off; nor fruits, when we use such
of them as are dead; nor sheep, when through shearing
we rather benefit than injure them, and by partaking
of their milk, we in return afford them every proper atten-

\

128 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

tion. Hence, the just man appears to be one who de
prives himself of things pertaining to the body; yet he
does not [in reality] injure himself. For, by this manage-
ment of his body, and continence, he increases his inward
good, t.e. his similitude to God.

27. By making pleasure, therefore, the end of life,
that which is truly justice cannot be preserved; since
neither such things as_are primarily useful according
to nature, nor all such as are easily attainable, give com-
pletion to felicity. For in many instances, the motions of
the irrational nature, and utility and indigence, have
been, and still are the sources of injustice. For men be-
came indigent [as they pretended] of animal food, in
order that they might preserve, as they said, the corporeal
frame free from molestation, and without being in want of
those things after which the animal nature aspires. But
if an assimilation to divinity is the end of life, an
innoxious conduct towards all things will be in the most
eminent degree preserved. As, therefore, he who is
led by his passions is innoxious only towards his children
and his wife, but despises and acts fraudulently towards
other persons, since, in consequence of the irrational part
predominating in him, he is excited to, and astonished
about mortal concerns; but he who is led by reason, pre-
serves an innoxious conduct towards his fellow-citizens,
and still more so towards strangers, and towards all men,
through having the irrational part in subjection, and
is therefore more rational and divine than the former
character ; — thus also, he who does not confine harmless
conduct to men alone, but extends it to other animals, is
more similar to divinity ; and if it was possible to extend
it even to plants, he would preserve this image in a still
greater degree. As, however, this is not possible, we
may in this respect lament, with the ancients‘, the defect
of our nature, that we consist of such adverse and dis-
cordant principles, so,that we are unable to preserve our

' Porphyry here particularly alludes to Empedocles.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK III. 129

divine part incorruptible, and in: all respects innoxious.
For we are not unindigent in all things; the cause of
which is generation, and our becoming needy through the
_ abundant corporeal efflux which we sustain. But want
procures safety and ornament from things of a foreign
mature, which are necessary to the existence οὗ our
mortal part. ‘ He, therefore, who is indigent of a greater
number of externals, is in.a greater degree agglutinated
to penury; and by how much his wants increase, by
so much is he destitute of divinity, and an associate of
penury. For that which is similar to deity, through this
assimilation immediately possesses true wealth... But no
‘one who is [truly] rich and perfectly unindigent. injures
any thing. For as long as any one injures another,
though he should possess the greatest wealth, and all the
acres of land which the earth contains, he is still poor,
and has want for his intimate associate. On this account,
also, he is unjust, without God, and impious, and en- |
‘slaved to every kind of depravity, which is produced by
the lapse of the soul into matter, through the privation of
good. Every thing, therefore, is nugatory to any one, as
long as he wanders from the principle of the universe ; and
‘he is indigent of all things, while he does not direct his
attention to Porus for the source of true abundance]. He
likewise yields to the mortal part of his nature, while he
remains ignorant of his real self. But Injustice is power-
.ful in persuading and corrupting those that belong to her
empire, because she associates with her votaries in con-
junction with Pleasure. As, however, in the choice of
lives, he is the more accurate judge who has obtained an
experience of both [the better and the worse kind of life],
than he is who has only experienced one of them; thus
also, in the choice and avoidance of what is proper, he is
a safer judge who, from that which is more, judges of that
which is less excellent, than he who from the less, judges of
the more excellent. Hence, he who lives according to intel-
lect, will more accurately define what is eligible and what
is not, than he who lives under the dominion of irration-
K

“

130 ON ABSTINENCE, &c. .

ality. For the former has passed through the irrational
life, as having from the first associated with it; but the
latter, having had no experience of an intellectual life,
persuades those that resemble himself, and acts with
nugacity, like a child among children. If, however, say
our opponents, all men were persuaded by these argu-
ments, what would become of us? Is it not evident that
we should be happy, injustice, indeed, being exterminated
from men, and justice being conversant with us, in the
same manner as it is in the heavens? But now this ques-
tion is just the same as if men should be dubious what
the life of the Danaids would be, if they were liberated
from the employment of drawing water in a sieve, and
attempting to fill a perforated vessel. For they are

ον dubious what would be the consequence if we should

cease to replenish our passions and desires, the whole of
which replenishing continually flows away through the
want of real good; since this fills up the ruinous clefts of
the soul more than the greatest of external necessaries.
Do you therefore ask, O man, what we should do? We
should imitate those that lived in the golden age, we
should imitate those of that period who were [truly] free.
For with them modesty, Nemesis, and Justice associated,
because they were satisfied with the fruits of the earth.

The fertile earth for them spontaneous yields
Abundantly her fruits ".

But those who are liberated from slavery, obtain for
themselves what they before procured for their masters.
In like manner, also, do you, when liberated from the
servitude of the body, and a slavish attention to the
passions produced through the body, as, prior to this, you
nourished them in an all-various manner with externals;
80 now nourish yourself all-variously with internal good,
justly assuming things which are [properly] your own, and
no longer by violence taking away things which are foreign
[to your true nature and real good].

" Hesiod. Oper. v. 117. -

ON

ABSTINENCE FROM ANIMAL FOOD.
BOOK THE FOURTH.

1. In the preceding books, O Castricius, we have nearly
answered all the arguments which in reality defend the
feeding on flésh, for the sake of incontinence and intem-
-perance, and which adduce impudent apologies for so
doing by ascribing a greater indigence to our nature than
is fit. Two particular inquiries, however, still remain;
in one of which the promise of advantage especially
deceives those who are corrupted by pleasure. And,
moreover, we shall confute the assertion of our opponents,
that no wise man, nor any nation, has rejected animal
food, as it leads those that hear it to great injustice,
through the ignorance of true history ; and we shall also
endeavour to give the solutions of the question concern-
igg advantage, and to reply to other inquiries.

2. But we shalt begin from the abstinence of certain
nations, in the narration of which, what is asserted of the
Greeks will first claim our attention, as being the most
allied to us, and the most appropriate of all the witnesses
that can be adduced. Among those, therefore, that have con-
cisely, and at the same time accurately collected an account
of the affairs of the Greeks, is the Peripatetic Dicearchus*,
who, in narrating the pristine life of the Greeks, says, the

* There were many celebrated men of this name among the ancients,
concerning which vid. Fabric. Biblioth, Grec. L. If. ¢. 11.

132 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

ancients, being generated with an alliance to the Gods,
were naturally most excellent, and led the best life; so
that, when compared to us of the present day, who con-
sist of an adulterated and most vile matter, they were
thought to be a golden race; and they slew no animal
whatever. The truth of this, he also says, is testified by
the poets, who denominate these ancients the golden race,
and assert that every good was present with them,

The fertile earth for them spontaneous bore
Of fruits a copious and ahenvy’d store ;

In blissful quiet then, unknown to strife,

The worthy with the worthy passed their life>.

Which assertions, indeed, Dicearchus explaining, says,
that a life of this kind was under Saturn; if it is proper
to consider it as a thing that once existed, and that it is a
life which has not been celebrated in vain, and if, laying
aside what. is extremely fabulous, we may refer it ta
a physical narration. All things, therefore, are very pro-
perly said to have been then spontaneously produced ; fox

_ © These lines are from Hesiod. Gper. 116. The different ages, how
‘ever, of mankind, which are celebrated by Hesiod in his Works and
Days, signify the different lives which the individuals of the humana
Species pass through ; and as Proclus on Hesiod beautifully observes,
they niay be comprehended in tliis triad, the golden, the silver, and the
_ brdgenage. But by the golden age an intellectual Hf is iniplied. For
such a life is pure, inspassive, and free from: sorrow ; and ‘of this inpa
sivity. and purity, gold is an image, through never being subject to rust or
putrefaction, Such a life, too, ig very properly said to be under Saturn,
because Saturn is an intelleciual God, or a God characterised by intel-
lect: ᾿ By the silver age, a rustic and siatural life is implied, ia which the
attention of the rational soul is entirely ditected to the care of the botly,
wet without procbeding τὸ dxtreme depravity. And by the brazen ape, ἃ
dire, tyrannic, gad cruel life is implied, which is entirely passive, and
oceeds to the very extremity of vice. The order, also, of these metala,
haumonizes, as Proclus observes, with that of the lives. “ F or,” says he,
* gold ‘is ‘sclar-form, because the sun is solely immaterial light. But
silver is lunar-form, because the moon partakes of shadow, just as silver
partakes of rust. .And brass is carthly, so far as not having ἃ nature
similar to a lueid bedy ; it is replete with abundaore. of corruption.” |

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 133

men did not procure any thing by labour, because they
were unacquainted with the agricultural art, and, in short,
had no knowledge of any other art. This very thing,
likewise, was the cause of their leading a life of leisure,
free from labours and care ; and if it is proper to assent to
the decision of the most skilful and elegant of physi-
cians, it was also the cause of their being liberated from
disease. For there is not any precept of physicians which
more contributes to health, than that which exhorts us not to
make an abundance of excrement, from which those pristine
Greeks always preserved their bodies pure. For they
neither assumed such food as was stronger than the
nature of the body could bear, but such as could be van-
quished by the corporeal nature, nor more than was
moderate, on account of the facility of procuring it,
but for the most part less than was sufficient, on account |
of its paucity. Moreover, there were neither any wars
among them, nor seditions with each other. For no
reward of contention worth mentioning was proposed
as an incentive, for the sake of which some one might be
induced to engage in such dissensions. So that the
principal thing in that life was leisure and rest from
necessary occupations, together with health, peace, and.
friendship. But to those in after times, who, through
aspiring after things which greatly exceeded mediocrity,
fell into many evils, this pristine life became, as it was
reasonable to suppose it would, desirable. The slender
and extemporaneous food, however, of these first men,
is manifested by the saying which was afterwards prover-
bially used, enough of the oak; this adage being probably
introduced by him who first changed the ancient mode of
living. . A pastoral life succeeded to this, in which men
procured for themselves superfluous possessions, and
meddled with animals. For, perceiving that some of
them were innoxious, but others malefic and savage, they
tamed the former, but attacked the latter. At the same
time, together with this life, war was introduced. And
these things, says Diczarchus, are not asserted by us, but

134 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

by those who have historically discussed a multitude
of particulars. For, as possessions were now of such
a magnitude as to merit attention, some ambitiously
endeavoured to obtain them, by collecting them [for their
own use], and calling on others to do the same, but
others directed their attention to the preservation of
them when collected. Time, therefore, thus gradually
proceeding, and men always directing their attention to
what appeared to be useful, they at length became con-
versant with the third, and agricultural form of life. And
this is what is said by Dicearchus, in his narration of the
manners of the ancient Greeks, and the blessed life which
they then led, to which abstinence from animal food con-
tributed, no less than other things. Hence, at that
period there was no war, because injustice was extermi-
nated. But afterwards, together with injustice towards
animals, war was introduced among men, and the endea-
vour to surpass each other in amplitude of possessions.
On which account also, the audacity of those is wonder-
ful, who say that abstinence from animals is the mother
of injustice, since both history and experience testify,
that together with the slaughter of animals, war and
injustice were introduced.

3. Hence, this being afterwards ‘perceived by the
Lacedemonian Lycurgus, though the eating of animals
then prevailed, yet he so arranged his polity, as to render
food of this kind requisite in the smallest degree. For
the allotted property of each individual did not consist in
herds of oxen, flocks of.sheep, or an abundance of goats,
horses, and money, but in the possession of land, which
might produce for a man seventy medimni¢ of barley, and
for a woman twelve, and the quantity of liquid fruits i
the same proportion. For he thought that this quantity
of nutriment was sufficient to procure a good habit of body
and health, nothing else to obtain these being requisite.
Whence also it is said, that on returning to his country,

¢ The medimnus was a measure containing six bashels.

ANIMAL FOOD.—:BOOK IV. | 135

after he had been for some time absent: from it, and
perceiving, as he passed through the fields, that the corn
had just been reaped, and that the threshing-floors and
the heaps were parallel and equable, he laughed, and said
to those that were present, that all Laconia seemed to
belong to many brothers, who had just divided the land
among themselves. He added, that as he had therefore
expelled luxury from Sparta, it would be requisite also to
annul the use of money, both golden and silver, and to
introduce iron alone, as its substitute, and this of a great
bulk and weight, and of little value; so that as much of
it as should be worth ten minz, should require a large
receptacle to hold it, and a cart drawn by two oxen to
carry it. But this being ordained, many species of in-
justice were exterminated from Lacedemon. For who
would attempt to thieve, or suffer himself to be corrupted
by gifts, or defraud or plunder another, when it was not
possible for him to conceal what he had taken, nor
possess it so as to be envied by others, nor derive any
advantage from coining it? Together with money also,
the useless arts were expelled, the works of the Lacede-
monians not being saleable. For iron money could: not
be exported to the other Greeks, nor was. it esteemed by
them, but ridiculed. Hence, neither was it lawful to buy
any thing foreign, and which was intrinsically of no
worth, nor did ships laden with merchandise sail into
their ports, nor was any verbal sophist, or futile diviner,
or bawd, or artificer of golden and silver ornaments, per-
mitted to come to Laconia, because there money was of
no use. And thus luxury, being gradually deprived of
its incitements and nourishment, wasted away of itself.
Those likewise who possessed much derived no greater
advantage from it, than those who did not, as no egress
was afforded to abundance, since it was so obstructed by |
impediments, that it was forced to remain in indolent
rest. Hence such household furniture as was in constant
use, and was necessary, such as beds, chairs, and tables,
these were made by them in the best manner ;.and the

136 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

Laconic cup, which was called cothon, was, as Critias
says, especially celebrated in military expeditions. For
in these expeditions, the water which they drank, and
which was unpleasant to the sight, was concealed by the
colour of the cup; and the turbid part of the water falling
against the lips, through their prominency, that part of it
which was drank, was received in a purer condition by
the mouth. As we are informed, however, by Plutarch,
the legislator was the cause of these things. For the.
artificers being liberated from useless works, exhibited
the beauty of art in things of a necessary nature.

4. That he might also in a still greater degree oppose.
luxury, and take away the ardent endeavour to obtain.
wealth, he introduced a third, and most beautiful political
institution, viz. that of the citizens eating and drinking .
together publicly; so that they might partake of the.
same prescribed food in common, and might not be fed
at home, reclining on sumptuous couches, and placed
before elegant tables, through the hands of artificers and -
cooks, being fattened in darkness, like voracious animals, -
and corrupting their bodies, together with their morals,
by falling into every kind of luxury and repletion; as. .
such a mode of living would require.much sleep, hot
baths, and abundant quiet, and such attentions as are
paid to the Giseased. This indeed was a. great thing;
but still greater than this, that, as: Theophrastus says,
he caused wealth to be neglected, and to be of no value,
through the citizens eating at common tables, and the
frugality of their food. For there was no use, nor enjoy-
ment of riches; nor, in short, was there any thing to
gratify the sight, or any ostentatious display in the
whole apparatus, because both the-poor and the rich
sat at the same table. Hence it was universally said,
that in Sparta alone,.Plutus was seen to be blind, and
lying like an inanimate and immoveable picture. For
it was not possible for the citizens, having previously
feasted at home, to -go to the common tables with
appetites already. satiated with food. For the rest care-_

Ι

’

ANIMAL FOOD,-—BOOK IY. 137’

fully observed him who did not eat and drink with them,.
and reviled him, as an intemperate person, and as one
who. conducted himself effeminately with respect to the
common food. Hence these common tables were called
phiditia; either as being the causes of friendship and.
benevolence, as if they were philitia, assuming ¢ for a;
or as accustoming men [προς εντελειαν καὶ φειδὼ] to frugality,
and a slender diet. But the number of those that as-
sembled at the common table was fifteen, more or less.
And each person brought every month, for the purpose
of furnishing the table, a medimnus of flour, eight choas4
of wine, five pounds of cheese, two. pounds and a half of
figs, and, besides all these, a very little quantity of money.

5. Hence the children of those who ate thus sparingly.
and..temperately, came to these common. tables, as to
schools of temperance, where they also heard | political
discourses, and were spectators of liberal sports. Here,
likewise, they learnt to jest acrimoniously,.without scur-
rility, and to receive, without being indignant, the biting
jests of others. . For this appeared to be extremely.
Laconic, to be able to endure acrimonious jests; though
he who could not endure was permitted to refuse hearing
them, and the scoffer was immediately silent. Such,
therefore, was the frugality of the Lacedemonians, with
respect to diet, though it was legally instituted for the
sake of the multitude. _Hence those who came from this
polity are said to have been more brave and temperate,
and paid more attention to rectitude, than those who
came from other communities, which are corrupted both
m souls and bodies. And it is evident that perfect
abstinence is adapted to such a polity as this, but to
corrupt communities luxurious food*. If, likewise, we

ἃ An Attic measure, containing six Attic pints.

ὁ In the original, καὶ δηλον ὡς τοιαυτὴ πολιτείᾳ οἰκειον, τὸ τὴς MMOYNE THE
παντελοῦς, ταῖς δὲ διεφθαρμέναις, τὸ τὴς βρωσεως. . But the latter part of this
sentence is evidently defective, though the defect is not noticed either
by Valentinus, or Reiske, or Rhoer. It appears therefore to me, that

.- 438 ὍΣ ABSTIMENCE FROM

direct our attention to such other nations as regarded
equity, mildness, and piety to the Gods, it will be evi-
dent that abstinence was ordained by them, with a view
to. the safety and advantage, if not of all, yet at least of
some of the citizens, who, sacrificing to, and worshipping
the Gods, on account of the city, might expiate the sins
of the multitude. For, in the mysteries, what the ‘boy
who. attends the altar accomplishes, by performing accu-
rately what he is commanded to do, in order to render
the Gods propitious to all those who have been initiated,
as far as to muesis’ [aves πάντων τῶν μυουμενων), that, in
nations and cities, priests are able to effect, by sacrificing -
for all the people, and through piety inducing the Gods
to be attentive to the welfare of those that belong to them.
With respect to priests, therefore, the eating of all animals
is prohibited to some, but of certain animals to others,
whether. you consider the customs of the Greeks or of
the barbarians, which are different in different nations.
So that all of them, collectively considered, or existing as
one, being assumed, it will be found that they abstain
from all animals. If, therefore, those who preside over
the safety of cities, and to whose care piety to the Gods
is committed, abstain from animals, how can any one
dare to accuse this abstinence as disadvantageous to
erties ? :

6. Cheremon the Stoie, therefore, in his narration of
the Egyptian priests, who, he says, were considered by
the Egyptians as philosophers, informs. us, that they
chose temples, as the places in which they might philoso-

ane τρύφης is wanting; so that for τὸ τὴσ βρωσεως, we should read so τῆς
ξνφης πὰς βρωσεως. And my conjecture is justified by the version of
Felicianus, which is, “ΚΞ Huic autem abstinentiam, ceteris luxuriam
victus fuisse peculiarem perspicuum est.” .

‘ Those who, in being initiated, elosed the eyes, which muesis
signifes, no longer (says Hermias in Phadrum) received. by sense
those divine ‘mysteries, but with the pure soul itself. See my. Dis-
sertation on the Eleusinian apd Bacchic Mysteries,

ΔΝΕΜΑΙ, EDOD:-~BOOK IV. - 139

phize. For to dwell with the statues of the Gods:is a
thing‘ allied to the whole desire, by which the soul tends
to the contemplation of their divinities. And from the
divine veneration indeed, which was paid to them through
dwelling in temples, they obtained security, all men
honouring these philosophers, as if they were certam
sacred animals. They also led a solitary life, .as they
only mingled with other men in solemm sacrifices and
festivals. But at other times the priests were almost in-
accessible to any one who wished to converse with them.
For it. was requisite that he who approached to them
should be first purified, and abstain from many things;
and this is as it were a common sacred law respecting
the Egyptian priests. But these [philosophic priests],
having relinquished every other employment, and human
labours®, gave up the whole of their life to the contempla-
tion and worship of divine natures and to divine inspira-
tion; through the latter, indeed, procuring for themselves
honour, security, and piety; but through contemplation
science ; and through both, a certain occult exercise of man-
ners, worthy of antiquity". For to be always conversant
with divine knowledge and inspiration, removes those who
are so from all-avarice, suppresses the passions, and excites
to an intellectual life. But they were. studious of frugality
in their diet and apparel, and also of continence. and
endurance, and in all things were attentive to justice and
equity. They likewise were rendered venerable, through
rarely mingling with other men. For during the time of
what are called purifications, they scarcely mingled :with
their nearest kindred, and those of their own order; nor
were they to be seen by any one, unless it was requisite

© In the original, xas πόρους ἀνθρωπίνους; but for πόρους I read wens, and
Felicianus appears to have found the same reading in his MS-.; for his
version is, “ laboribusque humanis.” Neither Reisk, however, nor
Rhoer, have at all noticed the word πόρους as improper in this place.

* Much is related about the Egyptian priests by Herodotus, tib. ii.
$7. With res to Charemon, the decisions of the ancients -con-
cerning him are very discosdant. .

140 _ ON. ΑΒΒΤΙΝΕΝΟΣ FROM...

for the necessary. purposes of purification. For the sanc- |
tuary was inaccessible to those who were not purified,
and they. dwelt in holy places for the purpose of per-
forming divine works; but at all other times they asso-
ciated more freely with those who lived like themselves.
They did not, however, associate with any one who was
not a religious character. But they were always seen
near to the Gods, or to the statues of the Gods, the
latter of which they were beheld either carrying, or pre-
ceding in a sacred procession, or disposing in an orderly
manner, with modesty and gravity; each of which opera-
tions was not the effect of pride, but an indication of
some physical reason. Their venerable gravity also was
apparent from their manners. For their walking was
orderly, and their aspect sedate; and they were so
studious of preserving this gravity of countenance, that
they did not even wink, when at any time they were
unwilling to do so; and they seldom laughed, and when
they did, their laughter proceeded no farther than to a
smile. . But they always kept their hands within their
garments. Each likewise bore about him a symbol, in-
dicative of the order which he was allotted in sacred
concerns; for there were many orders of priests. Their
diet also was slender and simple. For, ‘with respect to
wine, some of them did not at all drink it, but others
drank very little of it, on account of its being injurious
to the nerves, oppressive to the head, an impediment to
invention, and an incentive to venereal desires. In many
other things also they conducted themselves with cau-
tion; neither using bread at all in purifications, and at
those times in which they were not employed in purifying
themselves, they were accustomed to eat bread with
hyssop, cut into small pieces. For it 18 said, that hyssop
very much purifies the power of bread. But they, for the
most part, abstained from oil, the greater number of them
entirely ; and if at any time they used it with pot-herbs,
they took very little of it, and only as much as was
sufficient to mitigate the taste of the herbs. |

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK iV. 14]

7. It was not lawful for them therefore to meddle
with the dsculent and potable substances, which -were
produced out of Egypt, and this contributed much to. the
exclusion οὗ luxury from these priests. But. they ab-
stained from -all the fish that was caught in , and
from such quadrupeds as had solid, or many-fissured
hoofs, and from ‘such as were not horaed; and likewise
from all such birds as were carnivorous. Many of theta,
however, entirely abstained from al] animals; and in puri-
fications this abstinence was adopted by all of them, for
then they did not even eat an egg. Moreover, they also
rejected other things, without being calumniated for se
domg. Thus, for instance, of oxen, they rejected the
females, and also such of the males as were twins, or
_ were speckled, or of a different colour, or alternately
varied in their form, or which were now tamed, as having
been already consecrated to labours, and resembled ant~
mals that are honoured, or which were the images of any
thing [that is divine], or those that had hat one eye, or
those that verged to: ἃ similitude of the human form,
There are aleo innumerable other observations pertaining
to the art of those who are called μοσχοφραγισται, or wha
stamp calves with a seal, and of which books have been
composed. But these observations are still more curious
respecting birds; as, for instance, that a turtle should not
be eaten; for it is satd that a hawk frequently dismisses
this bird after he has seized it, and preserves its life, as a
reward for having had connexivn with it. The Egyptian
priests, therefore, that they might not ignorantly meddle
with a tartle of this kind, avoided the whole species of
those birds, And these indeed were certain common
religious ceremonies; but there were different cesemonies,
which varied according to the class of the priests that
used them, and were adapted to the several divinities.
But chastity and purifications were common to all the
priests. When also the time arrived in which they were
40 perform something -pertaiming to the sacred rites of
veligton, they spent some days in preparatery ceremonies,

142. ON ABSTINENCE FROM

some indéed forty-two, but others a greater, and others
a less number of days;. yet never less than seven
days; and during this time they abstained from all .Ἅ
animals, and likewise from all pot-herbs and legumi-
nous. substances, and, above all, from a venereal con-
nexion with women; for they never at any time -had
connexion with males. They likewise washed them-
selves with cold water thrice every day; viz. when they
rose from their bed, before dinner, and when they. betook
themselves to sleep. But if they happened to be polluted
in their sleep by the emission of the seed, they immedi-
ately purified their body ina bath. They. also used cold
bathing at other times, but not so frequently as on the
above occasion. Their bed was woven from the branches
of the palm tree, which they call dats; and their bolster
was a smooth semi-cylindric piece of wood. . But they
exercised themselves in the endurance of hunger and
thirst, and were accustomed to paucity of food through
the whole of their life.

8. This also is a testimony of their continence, that,
though they neither exercised themselves in walking or
riding, yet they lived free from disease, and were suffi-
ciently strong for the endurance of moderate labours.
They bore therefore many burdens in the performance of
sacred operations, and. accomplished many ministrant
works, which required more than common strength. But
they divided the night into the observation of the celestial
bodies, and sometimes devoted a part.of it to offices of
purification; and they distributed the day into the wor-
ship of the Gods, according to which they celebrated
them with hymns thrice or four times, viz. in the morning
and evening, when the sun is at his meridian altitude, and
when he is declining to the west. The rest of their time
they devoted to arithmetical and. geometrical speculations,
always labouring to effect something, and to make some
new discovery, and, in short, continually exercising their
skill, In winter nights also they were occupied in: the
same employments, being vigilantly engaged in literary -

(
ANIMAL ‘FOOD.~—BOOK IV. 143

pursuits, as paying no attention to the .acquisition of
externals, and being liberated from the servitude of that
bad master, excessive expense. Hence their unwearied
and incessant labour testifies their endurance, but their
continence is manifested by their liberation from. the
desire of external good. To sail from Egypt likewise, ~
[i. e..to quit Eeypt,] was considered by them to be one
of the most unholy things, in consequence of their being
careful to avoid foreign luxury and pursuits; for this
appeared to them to be alone lawful to those who were
compelled to do so by. regal necessities. Indeed, they
were very anxious to continue in the observance of the
institutes of their country, and those who were found to
have violated them, though but in a small degree, were
expelled [from the college of the priests]. The true
method of philosophizing, likewise, was preserved by the
prophets, by the /serostoltste', and the sacred scribes,
and also by the horologi, or calculators of nativities. But
the rest of the priests, and of the pastophori*, curators
of temples, and ministers of the Gods, were .similarly
studious of purity, yet not so accurately, and with such
great continence, as the priests of whom we have been
speaking. And such are the particulars which are nar-
rated of the Egyptians, by a man who was a lover of
truth, and an accurate writer, and who among the Stoics
strenuously and solidly philosophized.

9. But the Egyptian priests, through the proficiency
which they made by this exercise, and similitude te
divinity, knew that divinity does not pervade through
man alone, and that soul is not enshrined in man alone
on the earth, but that it nearly passes through all ani-
mals. On this account, in fashioning the images of the
Gods, they assumed every animal, and for this purpose
mixed together the human form and the forms of wild
beasts, and again the bodies of birds with the body of a

! 4. e. Those to whose care the sacred vestments were committed.

* These were so denominated from.carrymg the little receptacles ὦ in
which the images of the Gods were contained. ον οἱ

-. 144 ‘ON ABSTINENCE FROM

man. Fora certain deity was represented by them ina
human shape as far as to the neck, but the face was that
of a bird, or a lion, or of some other animal. And again,
another divine resemblance had a human head, but the
other parts were those of certain other animals, some
of which had an inferior, but others a superior position ;
through which they manifested, that these []. 6. brutes and
men], through the decision of the Gods, communicated
with ὁδοὶ other, and that tame and savage animals are
nurtured together with us, not without the concurrence of
a certain divine will. Hence also, a lion is worshipped
as a God, and a certain part of Egypt, which is called
᾿ Nomos, has the surname of Leontopolis [or the city of the
lion], and another is denominated Busiris [from an ox],
and another Lycopolis [or the city of the wolf]. , For
they venerated the power of God which extends to
all things through animals which are nurtured together,
and which each of the Gods imparts. They also reve-
renced water and fire the most of all the elements, as
being the principal causes of our safety. And these
things are exhibited by them in temples; for even now,
on opening the sanctuary of Serapis, the worship is per-
formed: through fire and water; he who sings the hymns
making a libation with water, and exhibiting fire, when,
standing on the threshold of the temple, he invokes the
God in the language of the Egyptians. Venerating,
therefore, these elements, they especially reverence those
things which largely participate of them, as partaking
more abundantly of what is sacred. But after these, they
‘venerate all animals, and in the village Anubis they wor-
ship a man, in which place also they sacrifice to him, and
victims are there burnt in honour of him on an altar; but
he shortly after only eats that which was procured for
-him as aman. Hence, as it is requisite to abstain from
man, 80, likewise, from other animals. . And farther still,
the Egyptian priests, from their transcendent wisdom
-and association: with divinity, discovered what animals
are more acceptable to the Gods [when dedicated to

ANIMAL FOOND.-——BOOK IV. 145

them] than man. Thus they found that a liawk is dear
. to the sun, since the whole of its nature consists of blood
and spirit. It also commiserates man, and laments over
his dead body, and scatters earth on his eyes, in which
these priests believe a solar light is resident. They like-
wise discovered that a hawk lives many years, and that,
after it leaves the present life, it possesses a divining
power, is most rational and prescient when liberated
from the body, and gives perfection to statues, and moves
temples. A beetle will be detested by one who is igno-
rant of and unskilled in divine concerns, but the Egyp-
tians venerate it, as an animated image of the sun. For
every beetle is a: male, and emitting its genital seed in‘a
muddy place, and having made it spherical, it turns
round the seminal sphere in a way similar to that of the
sun in the heavens. It likewise receives a period of
twenty-eight days, which 18 ἃ lunar period. Ina similar
manner, the Egyptians philosophize about the ram, the
crocodile, the vulture, and the ibis, and, in short, about
every animal; so that, from their wisdom and transcen-
dent knowledge of divine concerns, they came at length
to venerate all animals'!. An unlearned man, however,
does not even suspect that they, not being borne along
with the stream of the vulgar who know nothing, and not
walking in the path of ignorance, but passing beyond the
illiterate multitude, and that want of knowledge which
befals every one at first, were led to reverence things
which are thought by the vulgar to be of no worth.

10. This also, no less than the above-mentioned par-
ticulars, induced them to believe, that animals should be
reverenced [as images of the Gods], viz. that the soul
of every animal, when liberated from the body, was dis-
covered by them to be rational, to be prescient of futurity,
to possess an oracular power, and to be effective of
every thing which man is capable of accomplishing when
separated from the body. Hence they very properly

1 See on this subject Phutarch’s excellent treatise of Isis and Osiris,
L

[46 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

'
honoured them, and abstained from them as much as
possible. Since, however, the cause through which the
Egyptians venerated the Gods through animals requires
ἃ copious discussion, and which would exceed the limits
of the present treatise, what has been unfolded respecting
this particular is sufficient for our purpose. Nevertheless,
this is not to be omitted, that the Egyptians, when they
buried those that were of noble birth, privately took away
the belly and placed it in a chest, and together with other
things which they performed for the sake of the dead
body, they elevated the chest towards the sun, whom
they invoked as a witness; an oration for the deceased
being at the same time made by one of those to whose
care the funeral was committed. But the oration which
Euphantus™ has interpreted from the Egyptian tongue
was as follows: “ O sovereign Sun, and all ye Gods who
impart life to men, receive me, and deliver me to the
eternal Gods as a cohabitant. For I have always
piously worshipped those divinities which were pointed
out to me by my parents as long as I lived in this
age, and have likewise always honoured those who pro-
created my body. And, with respect to other men, I
have never slain any one, nor defrauded any one of what
he deposited with me, nor have I committed any other
atrocious deed. If, therefore, during my life I have acted
erroneously, by eating or drinking things which it is
unlawful to eat or drink, I have not erred through myself,
but through these,” pointing to the chest in which the
‘belly was contained. And having thus spoken, he threw
the chest into the river [Nile]; but buried the rest of the
body as being pure. After this manner, they thought an
apology ought to be made to divinity for what they had
eaten and drank, and for the insolent conduct which they
had been led to through the belly. ©

= Fabricius is of opinion, that this Euphantus is the same with the |
Ecphantus mentioned by Iamblichus (in Vit. Pyth.) as one of the Pytha-
goreans. Vid. Fabric. Bibl. Grec. lib. ii. c. 18.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 147

11. But among those who are known by us, the Jews,
before they first suffered the subversion of their legal
institutes under Antiochus, and afterwards under the
Romans, when also the temple in Jerusalem was cap-
tured, and became accessible to all men to whom, prior
to this event, it was inaccessible, and the city itself was
destroyed ;—— before this took place, the Jews always
abstained from many animals, but peculiarly, which they
even now do, from swine. At that period, ‘therefore,

_ there were three kinds of philosophers among them. And

_of one kind, indeed, the Pharisees were the leaders, but of

another, the Sadducees, and of the third, which appears to
have been the most venerable, the Esseans. The mode of
life, therefore, of these third was as follows, as Josephus
frequently testifies in many of his writings. For in the
second book of his Judaic History, which he has com-
pleted in seven books, and in the eighteenth of his Antiqui-
ties, which consists of twenty books, and likewise in the
second of the two books which he wrote against the Greeks,
he speaks of these Esseans, and says, that they are of the
race of the Jews, and are in a greater degree than others
friendly to one another. They are averse to pleasures,
conceiving them to be vicious, but they are of opinion
that continence, and the not yielding to the passions,
constitute virtue. And they despise, indeed, wedlock,
but receiving the children of other persons, and instruct-
ing them in disciplines while they are yet of a tender age,
they consider them as their kindred, and form them to
their own manners. And they act in this manner, not for
the purpose of subverting marriage, and the succession
arising from it, but in order to avoid the lasciviousness of
women. They are, likewise, despisers of wealth, and the
participation of external possessions among them in com-
mon is wonderful; nor is any one to be found among
them who is richer than the rest. For it is a law with
them, that those who wish to belong to their sect, must
give up their property to itin common; so that among all
of them, there is not to be seem either the abjectness
of poverty, or the insolence of wealth; but the posses-

148 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

sions of each being mingled with those of the rest, there
was one property with all of them, as if they had been
brothers. They likewise conceived oil to be a stain to
the body, and that if any one, though unwillingly, was
‘anointed, be should [immediately] wipe his body. For
it was considered by them as beautiful to be squalid”,

and to be always clothed in white garments. But cura-
tors of the common property were elected by votes, indis-
tinctly for the use of all. They have not, however, one
city, but in each city many of them dwell together, and
those who come among them from other places, if they,
are of their sect, equally partake with them of their pos-
sessions, as if they were their own. Those, likewise,
who first perceive these strangers, behave to them as if
they were their intimate acquaintance. Hence, when
they travel, they take nothing with them for the sake
of expenditure. But they neither change their garments
nor their shoes, till they are entirely torn, or destroyed by
time. They neither buy nor. sell any thing, but each
of them giving what he possesses to him that is in want,
receives in return for it what will be useful to him.
Nevertheless, each of them freely imparts to others of
their sect what they may be in want of, without any remu-
neration.

12. Moreover, they are peculiarly pious to divinity.
For before the sun rises they speak nothing profane, but they
pour forth certain prayers to him which they had received
from their ancestors, as if beseeching him to rise. After-
wards, they are sent by their curators to the exercise of the
several arts in which they are skilled, and having till the
fifth hour strenuously laboured in these arts, they are after-
wards collected together in one place; and there, being
begirt with linen teguments, they wash their bodies with
cold water. After this purification, they enter into their own

* This is not wonderful ; for the Jews appear to have been always
negligent of cleanliness. The intelligent reader will easily perceive that
there is some similitude between these Esseans and the ancient Pytha-
goreans, but that the latter were infinitely superior to the former. See
my translation of Iamblichus’ Life of Pythagoras.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 149

proper habitation, into which no heterodox person is per-
mitted to enter. But they being pure, betake themselves
to the dining room, as into a certain sacred fane. In this
place, when all of them are seated in silence, the baker
places the bread in order, and the cook distributes to
each of them one vessel containing one kind of eatables.
Prior, however, to their taking the food which is pure
and sacred, a priest prays, and it is unlawful for any one
prior to the prayer to taste of the food. After dinner,
likewise, the priest again prays; so that both when they
begin, and when they cease to eat, they venerate divinity.
Afterwards, divesting themselves of these garments as
sacred, they again betake themselves to their work till
the evening ; and, returning from thence, they eat and
drink in the same manner as before, strangers sitting with -
them, if they should happen at that time to be present.
No clamour or tumult ever defiles the house in which
they dwell ; but their conversation with each other is per-
formed in an orderly manner ; and to those that are out
of the house, the silence of those within it appears as if it
was some terrific mystery. The cause, however, of this
quietness is their constant sobriety, and that with them —
their meat and drink is measured by what is sufficient [to
the wants of nature]. But those who are very desirous
of belonging to their sect, are not immediately admitted
into it, but they must remain out of it for a year, adopting
the same diet, the Esseeans giving them a rake; a girdle,
and a white garment. And if, during that time, they have
given a sufficient proof of their continence, they proceed
to a still greater conformity to the institutes of the sect,
and use purer water for the purposes of sanctity ; though
they are not yet permitted to live with the Esseans.
For after this exhibition of endurance, their manners are
tried for two years more, and he who after this period
appears to deserve to associate with them, is admitted into
their society.

13. Before, however, he who is admitted touches his .
_ common food, he takes a terrible oath, in the first place,

150 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

that he will piously worship divinity; in the next place,
that he will preserve justice towards men, and that he will
neither designedly, nor when commanded, injure any
one; in the third place, that he will always hate the un-
just, but strenuously assist the just; and in the fourth
place, that he will act faithfully towards all men, but
especially towards the rulers of the land, since no one
becomes a ruler without the permission of God; in the
fifth place, that if he should be a ruler, he will never
employ his power to insolently iniquitous purposes, nor
will surpass those that are in subjection to him in his
dress, or any other more splendid ornament ; in the sixth
place, that he will always love the truth, and be hostile to
liars ; in the seventh place, that he will preserve his hands
from theft, and his soul pure from unholy gain°; and, in
the eighth place, that he will conceal nothing from those
of his sect, nor divulge any thing to others pertaining to
the sect, though some one, in order to compel him,
should threaten him with death. In addition to these
things, also, they swear, that they will not impart the
dogmas of the sect to any one in any other way than that
in which they received them; that they will likewise
abstain from robbery’, and preserve the books of their
sect with the same care as the names of the angels.
Such, therefore, are their oaths. But those among them
that act criminally, and are ejected, perish by an evil
destiny. For, being bound by their oaths and their cus-
toms, they are not capable of receiving food from others ;
but feeding on herbs, and having their body emaciated
by hunger, they perish. Hence the Esseans, commi-
serating many of these unfortunate men, receive them in
their last extremities into their society, thinking that
they have suffered sufficiently for their offences in having

* This was a very necessary oath for these Esszans to take; as the
Jews in general, if we may believe Tacitus and other ancient historians,
were always a people immoderately addicted to gain.

P As the Esszans appear to have been an exception to the rest of the
Jews, the reason is obvious why they took this oath.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 151

been punished for them till they were on the brink of the
grave. But they give a rake to those who intend to
belong to their sect, in order that, when they sit for the
purpose of exonerating the belly, they may make a trench
a foot in depth, and completely cover themselves by their
garment, in order that they. may not act contumeliously
towards the sun by polluting the rays of the God. And
so great, indeed, is their simplicity and frugality with
respect to diet, that they do not require evacuation till
the seventh day after the assumption of food, which day
they spend in singing hymns to God, and in resting from
labour. But from this exercise they acquire the power of
such great endurance, that even when tortured and burnt,
and suffering every kind of excruciating pain, they can-
not be induced either to blaspheme their legislator, or to
eat what they have not been accustomed to. And the
truth of this was demonstrated in their war with the
Romans. For then they neither flattered their tormen-
tors, nor shed any tears, but smiled in the midst of their ‘
torments, and derided those that inflicted them, and
cheerfully emitted their souls, as knowing that they
should possess them again. For this opinion was firmly
established among them, that their bodies were indeed
corruptible, and that the matter of which they consisted
was not stable, but.that their souls were immortal, and
would endure for ever, and that, proceeding from the
most subtle ether, they were drawn down by a natural
flux, and complicated with bodies; but that, when they
are no longer detained by the bonds of the flesh, then, as
if liberated from a long slavery, they will rejoice, and
ascend to the celestial regions. But from this mode of
living, and from being thus exercised in truth and piety,
there were many among them, as it is reasonable to sup-
pose there would be, who had a foreknowledge of future
events, as being conversant from their youth with sacred
books, different purifications, and the declarations of the
prophets. And such is the order [or sect] of the
Esseans among the Jews. .

-

΄

152 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

14, All of them, however, were forbidden to eat the’
flesh of swine, or fish without scales, which the Greeks
call cerayia, t.e. cartilaginous; or to eat any animal that
has solid hoofs. They were likewise forbidden not only
to refrain from eating, but also from killing animals that
fled to their houses as supplicants. Nor did the legis-
lator permit them to slay such animals as were parents
together with their young; but ordered them to spare,
even in a hostile land, and not put to death brutes that
assist us in our labours. Nor was the legislator afraid
that the race of animals which are not sacrificed, would,
through being spared from slaughter, be so increased in
multitude as to produce famine among mén; for he knew,
in the first place, that multiparous animals live but for
a short time; and in the next place, that many of them
perish, unless attention is paid to them by men. More-
over, he likewise knew that other animals would attack
those that increased excessively; of which this Is an
indication, that we abstain from many amimals, such as
lizards, worms, flies, serpents, and dogs, and yet, at the
same time, we are not afraid of perishing through hunger
by abstaining from them, though their increase ts abun-
dant. And in the next place, it is not the same thing to
eat and to slay an animal. For we destroy many of the
above-mentioned animals, but we do not eat any of them.

15. Farther still, it is likewise related that the Syrians
formerly abstained from animals, and, on this account,
did not sacrifice them to the Gods; but that afterwards
they sacrificed them, for the purpose of averting certain
evils ; yet they did not at all admit of a fleshly diet. In
process of time, however, as Neanthes the Cyzicenean
and Asclepiades the Cyprian say, about the era of Pyg-
malion, who was by birth a Pheenician, but reigned over
the Cyprians, the eating of flesh was admitted, from an
illegality of the following kind, which Asclepiades, in his
treatise concerning Cyprus and Pheenicia, relates as fol-
lows:—In the first place, they did not sacrifice any
thing animated to the Gods; but neither was there any

\

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 153

law pertaining to a thing of this kind, because it was
_ prohibited by natural law. They are-said, however, on a
certain occasion, in which one soul was required for
another, to have, for the first time, sacrificed a victim ;
and this taking place, the whole of the victim was then
consumed by fire. But afterwards, when the victim was
burnt, a portion of the flesh fell on the earth, which was
taken by the priest, who, in so doing, having burnt his
fingers, involuntarily moved them to his mouth, as a
remedy for the pain which the burning produced. Having,
therefore, thus tasted of the roasted flesh, he also desired
to eat abundantly of it, and could not refrain from giving
some of it to his wife. Pygmalion, however, becoming
acquainted with this circumstance, ordered both the
priest and his wife to be hurled headlong from a steep
rock, and gave the priesthood to another person, who not
long after performing the same sacrifice, and eating the
flesh of the victim, fell into the same calamities as his
predecessor. The thing, however, proceeding still farther,
and men using the same kind of sacrifice, and through
yielding to desire, not abstaining from, but feeding on
flesh, the deed was no longer punished. Nevertheless
abstinence from fish continued among the Syrians till the
time of Menander : for he says,

The Syrians for example take, since these
When by intemperance led of fish they eat,
Swoln in their belly and their feet become.
With sack then cover’d, in the public way
They on a dunghill sit, that by their lowly state,
The Goddess may, appeas’d, the crime forgive.

/

16. Among the Persians, indeed, those who are wise
in divine concerns, and worship divinity, are called Magi;
for this is the signification of Magus, in the Persian
tongue. But so great and so venerable are these men
thought to be by the Persians, that Darius, the son
of Hystaspes, had among other things this engraved on
his tomb, that he had been the master of the Magi. They

54 -ON ABSTINENCE FROM

are likewise divided into three genera, as we are informed
by Eubulus, who wrote the history of Mithra, in a treatise
consisting of many books. In this work he says, that
the first and most learned class of the Magi neither eat
nor slay any thing animated, but adhere to the ancient
abstinence from animals. The second class use some
animals indeed [for food], but do not slay any that are
tame. Nor do those of the third class, similarly with
other men, lay their hands on all animals. For the
dogma with all of them which ranks as the first is this,
that there is a transmigration of souls; and this they
also appear to indicate in the mysteries of Mithra. For

in these mysteries, obscurely signifying our having some- ~

thing in common with brutes, they are accustomed to
call us by the names of different animals. Thus they
denominate the males who participate in the same mys-
teries lions, but the females lionesses, and those who are
ministrant to these rites crows. With respect to their
fathers also, they adopt the same mode. For these are
denominated by them eagles and hawks. And he wha
is initiated in the Leontic mysteries, is invested with all-
various forms of animals‘; of which particulars, Pallas, in
his treatise concerning Mithra, assigning the cause, says,
that it is the common opinion that these things are to be
referred to the circle of the zodiac, but that truly and
accurately speaking, they obscurely signify something
pertaining to human souls, which, according to the Per-

4 Similar to this was the garment with which Apuleius was invested
after his initiation into the mysteries of Isis, and which he describes as
follows :—“‘ There [#. e. on a wooden throne] I sat conspicuous, in a
garment which was indeed linen, but was elegantly painted. A pre-
cious cloak also depended from my shoulders behind my back, as far as
to my heels. Nevertheless, to whatever part of me you directed your
view, you might see that 1 was remarkable by the animals which were
painted round my vestment, in various colours. Here were Indian
dragons, there Hyperborean griffins, which the other hemisphere gene-
rates in the form of a winged animal. Men devoted to the service of
divinity, call this cloak the Olympic garment.” — See Book 11. of my
translation of the Metamorphosis of Apuleius.

΄

-

ες ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IY. 154

sians, are invested with bodies of all-various forms.. For
the Latins also, says Eubulus, call some men, in their
tongue, boars and scorpions, lizards, and blackbirds.
After the same manner likewise the Persians denominate
the Gods the demiurgic causes of these: for they call
Diana a she-wolf; but the sun,a bull,a lion, a dragon, and
a hawk; and Hecate, a horse, a bull, a lioness, and a dog.
But most theologists say that the name of Proserpine
[της ΦερεφατΊης} is derived from nourishing a ringdove,
[παρα τὸ φερξειν τὴν Qarlav]: for the ringdove is sacred to
this Goddess". Hence, also, the priests of Maia dedicate.

τ Proclus, however, in his Scholia on the Cratylus of Plato, gives &
much more theological account of the derivation of the name of Proser-
pine, as follows: — “ Socrates now delivers these three vivific monads
in a consequent order, viz. Ceres, Juno, Proserpine; calling the first
the mother, the second the sister, and the third the daughter of the
Demiurgus [Jupiter]. All of them, however, are partakers of the whole
of fabrication; the first in an exempt manner, and intellectually; the
secon@ in a fontal manner, and, at the same time, in a way adapted to a
principle [agysnec]; and the third in. a manner adapted to a principle
and a leader [αρχίκως nas πγεμονικως.

Of these Goddesses the last is allotted triple powers, and impartibly
and uniformly comprehends three monads of Gods. But she is called
Core [og] through the purity of her essence, and her undefiled trans-
cendency in her generations. She also possesses a first, middle, and last
empire; and according to her summit, indeed, she is called Diana by
Orpheus ; but, according to her middle, Proserpine ; and according to
the extremity of the order, Minerva. Likewise, according to an essence
transcending the other powers of this triple vivific order, the dominion of
Hecate is established; but according to a middle power, and which is
generative of wholes, that of soul; and, according to intellectual con-
version, that of Virtue ®. Ceres, therefore, subsisting on high, and among
the supermundane Gods, uniformly extends this triple order of divinities ;
and, together with Jupiter, generates Bacchus, who impartibly presides
over partible fabrication. But beneath, in conjunction with Pluto, she
is particularly beheld according to the middle characteristic: for it is
this which, proceeding every where, imparts vivification to the last of

* Proclus says this conformably to the theology of the Chaldeans ;
for, according to that theology, the first monad of the vivific triad is
Hecate, the second Soul, and the third Virtue.

156 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

to her a ringdove. And Maia is the same with Proser-
pine, as being obstetric, and a nurse’. For this God-

4

things. Hence she is called Proserpine, because she especially asso-
ciates with Pluto, and, together with bim, distributes in an orderly man-
ner the extremities of the universe. And, according to her extremities,
indeed, she is said to be a virgin, and to remain undefiled ; but, accord-
ing to her middle, to be conjoined with Hades, and to beget the Furies in
the subterranean regions. She, therefore, is also called Ceres, but
after another manner than the supermundane and ruling Ceres. For the
one is the connective unity of the three vivific principles; but the
other is the middle of them, in herself possessing the peculiarities of the
extremes. Hence, in the Proserpine conjoined with Pluto, you will find
the peculiarities of Hecate and Minerva; but these extremes subsist in
her occultly, while the peculiarity of the middle shines forth, and that
which is characteristic of ruling soul, which in the supermundane Ceres
was of a ruling® nature, but here subsists according to ἃ mundane pecu-
larity.”

Proclus farther observes, “ that Proserpine is denominated either
through judging of forms, and separating them from each other, thus
obscurely signifying the subversion of slaughter}, (δια τὸ κρίνειν τὰ εἰδη, και
χωρίζειν ἀλληλῶν ὡς τοῦ geyou THY avaipEctY αἰμττο μενον) or through separating
souls perfectly from bodies, through a conversion to things on high,
which is the most fortunate slaughter and death to such as are worthy of it.
(ὃ δια τὸ χωριζεῖιν τὰς ψυχας τέλεως ax τῶν σωμάτων δια THE πρὸς τὰ ἀγὼ EMICleopNE,
σπερ ἐστιν ευτυχεσήατος φονος καὶ ϑανατος τοῖς ἀξιουμένοις ταυτου.) But the name
φερέφαττα, Pherephatta, is adapted to Proserpine, according to a contact
with generation; but according to wisdom and counsel, to Minerva. At
the same time, however, all the appellations by which she is distin-
guished, are adapted to the perfection of soul. On this account, also,
she is called Proserpine, and not by the names of the extremes; since
that which was ravished by Pluto, is this middle deity ; the extremes at
the same time being firmly established in themselves; according to which
Ceres is said to remain a virgin.

* The first sulsistence of Maia, who, according tu the Orphic theology,
is the same with the Goddess Night, is at the summit of the intelligible,

* That is, of a supermundane nature; for the ruling are the super-
mundane Gods.
t Proclas here alludes to the war which subsists among forms through

their union with matter, and which Proserpine subverts by separating
them from each other.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK Iv. 157

dess is terrestrial, and so likewise is Ceres. To this
Goddess, also, a cock is consecrated ; and on this account
those that are initiated in her mysteries abstain from
domestic birds. In the Eleusinian mysteries, likewise, the
Initiated are ordered to abstain from domestic birds, from
fishes and beans, pomegranates and apples; which fruits
are as equally defiling to the touch, as a woman re-
cently delivered, and a dead body. But whoever is ac-
quainted with the nature of divinely-luminous appearances
[φασματα,} knows also on what'account it is requisite to
abstain from all birds, and especially for him who hastens
to be liberated from terrestrial concerns, and to be
established with the celestial Gods. Vice, however, as
we have frequently said, is sufficiently able to patronize
itself, and especially when it pleads its cause among the
ignorant. Hence, among those that are moderately
vicious, some think that a dehortation of this kind is
vain babbling, and, according to the proverb, the nu-
gacity of old women; and others are of opinion that it is
superstition. But those who have made greater advances
in improbity, are prepared, not only to blaspheme those
who exhort to, and demonstrate the propriety of this —
abstinence, but calumniate purity itself as enchantment
and pride. They, however, suffering the punishment of
their sins, both from Gods and men, are, in the first
place, sufficiently punished by a disposition [2. 6. by a
depravity] of this kind. We shall, therefore, still farther
make mention of another foreign nation, renowned and

and at the same time intellectual order, and is wholly absorbed in the
intelligible. As we are also informed by Proclus (in Cratylum), “ She
is the paradigm of Ceres, For immortal Night is the nurse of the Gods
[according to Orpheus]. Night, however, is the cause of aliment intel-
ligibly: for the intelligible is, as the Chaldean Oracle says, the aliment
of the intellectual orders of Gods. But Ceres, first of all, separates the
two kinds of aliment [nectar and ambrosia] in the Gods.” He adds,
** Hence our sovereign mistress [%sewove], Ceres, not only generates
life, but that which gives perfection to life; and this from supernal
natures, to such as are last. For virtue is the perfection of souls.”

158 -. ON ABSTINENCE FROM

just, and believed to be pious in divine concerns, and
then pass on to other particulars.

17. For the polity of the Indians being distributed
into many parts, there is one tribe among them of men
divinely wise, whom the Greeks are accustomed to call
Gymnosophists‘. But of’ these there are two sects, over
one of which the Bramins preside, but over the other the
Samaneans. The race of the Bramins, however, receive
divine wisdom of this kind by succession, in the same
manner as the priesthood. But the Samaneans are
elected, and consist of those who wish to possess divine
knowledge. And the particulars respecting them are the
following, as the Babylonian Bardesanes " narrates, who
lived in the times of our fathers, and was familiar with
those Indians who, together with Damadamis, werc sent
to Cesar. All the Bramins originate from one stock;
for all of them are derived from one father and one
mother. But the Samaneans are not the offspring of
one family, being, as we have said, collected from every
nation of Indians.. A Bramin, however, is not a subject
ef any government, nor does he contribute any thing
together with others to government. And with respect
to those that are philosophers, among these some dwell
on mountains, and others about the river Ganges. And
those that live on mountains feed on autumnal fruits, and
en cows’ milk coagulated with herbs. But those that
reside near the Ganges, live also on autumnal ‘fruits,
which are produced in abundance about that river. The
land likewise nearly always bears new fruit, together with
much rice, which grows spontaneously, and. which they
use when there is a deficiency of autumnal fruits. But to
taste of any other nutriment, or, in short, to touch animal
food, is considered by them as equivalent to extreme

* Concerning the Indian philosophers, see the second book of Dio-
dorus Siculus.

" This is the Bardesanes who lived in the time of Marcus Antoninus,
and who wrote a treatise on the Lake of Probation in India, which is
mentioned by-Porphyry in his fragment ‘De Styge, preserved by Stobetis.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK {V. 189

impurity and impiety. And this is one of their dogmas.
They also worship divinity with piety and purity. They
spend the day, and the greater part of the night, in
hymns and prayers to the Gods; each of them having a
cottage to himself, and living, as much as possible, alone. —
For the Bramins cannot endure to remain with others,
nor to speak much ; but when this happens to take place,
they afterwards withdraw themselves, and do not speak
for many days. They likewise frequently fast. But the
Samaneans are, as we have said, elected. When, how-
ever, any one is desirous of being enrolled in their order,
he proceeds to the rulers of the city ; but abandons the
city or village that he inhabited, and the wealth and all
the other property that he possessed. Having likewise
the superfluities of his body cut off, he receives a garment,
and departs to the Samaneans, but does not return either
to his wife or children, if he happens to have any, nor
does he pay any attention to them, or think that they at
all pertain to him. And, with respect to his children
indeed, the king provides what ig/necessary for them, and
the relatives provide for the wife. And such is the life
of the Samaneans. But they live out of the city, and
spend the whole day in conversation pertaining to
divinity. They have also houses and temples, built by
the king, in which there are stewards, who receive a
certain emolument from the king, for the purpose of
supplying those that dwell in them with nutriment. But
their food consists of rice, bread, autumnal fruits, and
pot-herbs. And when they enter into their house, the
sound of a bell being the signal of their entrance, those
that are not Samanzans depart from it, and the Sama-
neans begin immediately to pray. But having prayed,
again, on the bell sounding as a signal, the servants give
to each Samanean a platter, (for two of them do not eat
out of the same dish,) and feed them with rice. And to
him who is in want of a variety of food, a pot-herb is
added, or some autumnal fruit. But having eaten as
much as is requisite, without any delay they proceed to

160. ON ABSTINENCE FROM

their accustomed employments. All of them likewise are
unmarried, and have no possessions: and so much are
both these and the Bramins venerated by the other
Indians, that the king also visits them, and requests them
to pray to and supplicate the Gods, when any calamity
befals the country, or to advise him how to act.

18. But they are so disposed with respect to death,
that they unwillingly endure the whole time of the pre-
sent life, as a certain servitude to nature, and therefore
they hasten to liberate their souls from the bodies [with
which they are connected]. Hence frequently, when
they are seen to be well, and are neither oppressed, nor
driven to desperation by any evil, they depart from life.
And though they previously announce to others that it is
their intention to commit suicide, yet no one impedes
them ; but, proclaiming all those to be happy who thus
quit the present life, they enjoin certain things to the
domestics and kindred of the dead: so stable and true do
they, and also the multitude, believe the assertion to be,
that souls [in another life] associate with each other.
But as soon as those to whom they have proclaimed that
this is their intention, have heard the. mandates given to
them, they deliver the body to fire, in order that they
may separate the soul from the body in the purest
manner, and thus they die celebrated by all the Samane-
ans. For these men dismiss their dearest friends to death
more easily than others part with their fellow-citizens
when going the longest journeys. And they lament
themselves, indeed, as still continuing in life; but they
procldim those that are dead to be blessed, in conse-
quence of having now obtained an immortal allotment.
Nor is there any sophist, such as there is now amongst
_ the Greeks, either among these Samaneans, or the above-
mentioned Bramins, who would be seen to doubt and
to say, if all men should imitate you [. 6. should imitate
those Samanezans who commit suicide], what would
become of us? Nor through these are human affairs con-
fused. For neither do all men imitate them, and those

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 16]

who have, may be said to have been rather the causes of
équitable legislation, than of confusion to the different
hations of men. Moreover, the law did not compel
the Samaneans and Bramins to eat animal food, but, per-
mitting others to feed on flésh, it suffered these to be
a law to themselves, and venerated them as being supe-
tior to law. Nor did the law subject these men to the
punishment whieh it inflicts, as: Ηἶ they were the primary
perpetrators of injustice, but it reserved this for others.
Hence, to those who ask, what would be the consequence
if all men imitated such characters as these, the saying of
Pythagoras must be the answer; that if all men were
kings, the passage through life would be difficult, yet regal
government is not on this aceount to be avoided. And [we
likewise say] that if all men were worthy, no administra-
tion of a polity would be found in which the dignity that
probity merits would be preserved. Nevertheless, no one
would be so insané as not to think that all men should —
earnestly endeavour to become worthy characters. Indeed,
the law grants to the vulgar many other things [besides a
fleshly diet], which, nevertheless, it does not grant to
a philosopher, not even to one who conducts the affairs of
fovernment in a proper manner. For it does not receive
every artist into the administration, though it does not
forbid the exercise of any art, nor yet men of every pur-
suit. But it excludes those who are occupied in vile and
illiberal arts*, and, in short, all those who are destitute of
justice and the other virtues, from having any thing to do
with the management of public affairs. Thus, likewise,
the law does not forbid the vulgar from associating with
harlots, on whom at the same time it imposes a fine ; but
thinks that it is disgraceful and base for men that are
moderately good to have any connexion with them.
Moreover, the law does not prohibit a man from spending
the whole of his life in a tavern, yet at the same time this

* Baraven, ὑ. 6. dirty mechanics and bellows-blowers, an appella-
‘ion -by whith Plato in hie Rivals designates the experimentalists..
M

162 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

is most disgraceful even to a man of moderate worth. It
appears, therefore, that the same thing must also be said
with respect to diet. For that which is permitted to the
multitude, must not likewise be granted to the best of
men. For the man who is a philosopher, should espe-
cially ordain for himself those sacred laws -which the
Gods, and men who are followers of the Gods, have insti-
tuted. But the sacred laws of nations and cities appear
to have ordained for sacred men purity, and to have
interdicted them animal food. They have also forbidden
the multitude to eat certain animals, either from motives -
of piety, or on account of some injury which would be
produced by the food. So that it is requisite either: to
imitate priests, or to be obedient to the mandates of all
legislators ; but, in‘either way, he who is perfectly legal
and pious ought to abstain from all animals. For if some
who are only partially pious abstain from certain animals,
he who is in every respect pious will abstain from all
animals.

19. I had almost, however, forgotten to adduce what
is said by Euripides, who asserts, that the prophets of
Jupiter in Crete abstained from animals. But what
is said by the chorus to Minos on this subject, is as
follows :

Sprung fromy Pheenicia’s royal line,
Son of Europa, nymph divine,

And mighty Jove, thy envy’d reign
O’er Crete extending, whose domain
Is with a hundred cities crown’d —

I leave yon consecrated ground,

Yon fane, whose beams the artist’s toil
With cypress, rooted from the soil,
Hath fashion’d. In the mystic rites
Initiated, life’s best delights

I place in chastity alone,

Midst Night’s dread orgies wont to rove,
The priest of ZagreusY and of Jove ;

y Zagreus is-an epithet of Bacchus. Wodhull, however, from whose
translation of Euripides the above lines are taken, 15 greatly mistaken in

-. ᾿

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 163

Feasts of crude flesh I now decline,
And wave aloof the blazing pine

΄ To Cybele, nor fear to claim
Her own Curete’s hallow’d name ;
Clad in a snowy vest I fly

- Far from the throes of pregnancy, -

Never amidst the tombs intrude,
And slay no animal for food.

20. For holy men were of opinion that purity con-
sisted in a thing not being mingled with its contrary, and
that mixture is defilement. Hence, they thought that
nutriment should be assumed from fruits, and not from
dead bodies, and that we should not, by introducing
that which is animated to our nature, defile what is
administered by nature. But they conceived, that the
slaughter of animals, as they are sensitive, and the
depriving them of their souls, is a defilement to the
living ; and that the pollution is much greater, to mingle
a body which was once sensitive, but is now deprived of
sense, with a sensitive and living being. Hence univer-
sally, the purity pertaining to piety consists in rejecting

and abstaining from many things, and in an abandonment

of such as are of a contrary nature, and the assumption of
such as are appropriate and concordant. On this account,
venereal connexions are attended with defilement. For
in these, a conjunction takes place of the female with the
male; and the seed, when retained by the woman, and
causing her to be pregnant, defiles the soul, through its -
association with the body ; but when it does not produce
conception, it pollutes, in consequence of becoming a
lifeless mass. The connexion also of males with males
defiles, because it is an emission of seed as it were into a
dead body, and because it is contrary to nature. And, in
short, all venery, and emissions of the seed in sleep,

saying, that “it is evident from the hymns of Orpheus that Zagreus was
& name given to Bacchus at his sacred rites.” For the word Zaygtue
(Zagreus) is not to be found either in the hymns of Orpheus, or in any
other of the Orphic writings that are extant.

164 ΟΝ ABSTINENCE FROM

pollute, because the soul becomes mingled with the body,
and is drawn down to pleasure. The passions of the soul
likewise defile, through the complication of the irrational
and effeminate part with reason, the internal masculine
part. For, in a certain respect, defilement and pollution
manifest the mixture of things of an heterogeneous
nature, and especially when the abstersion of this mixture
is attended with difficulty. Whence, also, in tinctures
which are produced through mixture, one species being
complicated with another, this mixture is denominated
a defilement.

As when some woman with a lively red
Stains the pure iv’ry

says Homer’. And again, painters call the mixtures of
colours, corruptions. It is usual, likewise, to denominate
that which is unmingled and pure, incorruptible, and te
call that which is genuine, uopolluted. For water, when
mingled with earth, is corrupted, and is not genuine.
But water which is diffluent, and runs with tumultuous
rapidity, leaves behind in its course the earth which it
cairies in its stream.

When from a limpid and perennial fount
It defluous runs.

as Hesiod says*. For such water is salubrious, because
it is uncorrupted and unmixed. The female, likewise, that
does not receive into herself the exhalation of seed,
as said to be uncorrupted. So that the mixture of con-
traries is corruption and defilement. For the mixture of
dead with living bodies, and the insertion of beings that
‘were once living and sentient into animals, and of dead
into living flesh, may be reasonably supposed to intro-
duce defilement and stains to our nature ; just, again, as
the soul is polluted when it is invested with the body.
Hence, he who is born, is polluted by the mixture of

Tliad, ΓΝ. ν. 141. * Oper, οἱ Dies, 505.

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. 165

his soul with body; and he who dies, defiles his body,
through leaving it a corpse, different and foreign from
that which possesses life. The soul, likewise, is polluted
by anger and desire, and the multitude of passtons of
which in a certain respect diet is a co-operating cause.
But as water which flows through a rock is more uncor-
rupted than that which runs through marshes, because it
does not bring with it much mud; thus, also, the soul
which administers its own affairs in a body that is dry,
and is not moistened by the juices of foreign flesh, is in a
more excellent condition, is more uncorrupted, and is
more prompt for intellectual energy. Thus too, it ts said,
that the thyme which is the driest and the sharpest
to the taste, affords the best honey to bees. The dianoe-
tic, therefore, or discursive power of the soul, is polluted ;
or rather, he who energizes dianoétically, when ts
energy is mingled with the energies of either the imagi-
native or doxastic power. But purification consists in
a separation from all these, and the wisdom which is
adapted to divine concerns, is a desertion of every thing,
of this kind. The proper nutriment, likewise, of each.
thing, is that which essentially preserves it. Thus you.
may say, that the nutriment of a stone is the cause of its:

continuing to be a stone, and of firmly remaining in a.

lapideous form; but the nutriment of a plant 15. that.

which preserves it in increase and fructification ; and of

an animated body, that which preserves its composition.
It is one thing, however, to nourish, and another to
fatten; and one thing to impart what is necessary, and
another to procure what is luxurious. Various, therefore,
are the kinds of nutriment, and various also is the nature
of the things that are nourished. And it is necessary,.
indeed, that all.things should be nourished, but we
should earnestly endeavour to fatten our most principal.
parts. Hence, the nutriment of the rational soul is that.
which preserves it in a rational state. But this is intel-
lect; so that it is to be nourished by intellect; and we-
should earnestly endeavour that it may be fattened
\

--

166 _ON ABSTINENCE FROM

through this, rather than that the flesh may become
pinguid through esculent substances. For intellect pre-
serves for us eternal life, but the body when fattened
causes the soul to be famished, through its hunger after a ©
‘blessed life not being satisfied, increases our mortal part,
‘since it is of itself insane, and impedes our attainment of
an immortal condition of being. It likewise defiles by
corporifying the soul, and drawing her down to that
which is foreign to her nature. And the magnet, indeed,
imparts, as it were, a soul to the iron which is placed
near it; and the iron, though most heavy, is elevated, and
runs to the spirit of the stone. Should he, therefore, who
is suspended from incorporeal and intellectual deity, be
anxiously busied in procuring food which fattens the
body, that is an impediment to intellectual perception ?
Ought he not rather, by contracting what is necessary
to the flesh into that which is little and easily procured,
be himself nourished, by adhering to God more closely
than the iron to the magnet? I wish, indeed, that our
nature was not so corruptible, and that it were possible
we could live free from molestation, even without the
nutriment derived from fruits. O that, as Homer”. says,
we were not in want either of meat or drink, that we
might be truly immortal!—the poet in thus speaking
beautifully signifying, that food is the auxiliary not only.
of life, but also of death. If, therefore, we were not
in want even of vegetable aliment, we should be by
so much the more blessed, in proportion as we should be
more immortal. But now, being in a mortal condition,
we render ourselves, if it be proper so to speak, still more
mortal, through becoming ignorant that, by the addition
of this mortality, the soul, as Theophrastus says, does
not only confer a great benefit on the body by being its
inhabitant, but gives herself wholly to 115. Hence, it is

b Tliad, V. v. 341.

© Inthe original, ov πολὺ τὸ svoinsov, ὡς φησι ποὺ Θεόφραστος, τῷ σωμώσι
διδουσης τῆς ψυχης, κιτιλ, But for ov πολὺ τὸ ἐγοίκίον, it appears to me to be
necessary to read, ov provey πολύ τὸ ἐνοίκιον, κτλ.

oe

ANIMAL FOOD.—BOOK IV. ᾿ς 67

much to be wished that we could easily obtain the life
celebrated in fables, in which hunger and thirst are
unknown; so that, by stopping the every-way-flowing
river of the body, we might in a very little time be
present with the most excellent natures, to which he who
accedes, since deity is there, is himselfa God. But how
is it possible not to lament the condition of the generality
of mankind, who are so involved in darkness as to cherish
their own evil, and who, in, the first place, hate them-
selves, and him who truly begot them, and afterwards,
those who admonish them, and call on them to return
from ebriety to a sober condition of being? Hence, dis-
missing things of this kind, will it not be requisite to pass
‘on to what remains to be discussed ?

21]. Those then who oppose the Nomades, or Troglo-
dytz*, or Ichthyophagi, to the legal institutes of the nations
which we have adduced, are ignorant that these people were
brought to the necessity of eating animals through the infe-
cundity of the region they inhabit, which is so barren, that it
does not even produce herbs, but only shores and sands.
And this necessity is indicated by their not being able to
make use of fire, through the want of combustible materials ;
but they dry their fish on rocks, or on the shore. And
these indeed live after this manner from necessity. There
are, however, certain nations whose manners are rustic,
and who are naturally savage; but it is not fit that those
who are equitable judges should, from such instances as
these, calumniate human nature. For thus we should not
only be dubious whether it is proper to eat animals, but
also, whether we may not eat men, and adopt all other
savage manners. It is related, therefore, that the Massa-
getee and the Derbices consider those of their kindred to
be most miserable who die spontaneously. Hence, pre-
venting their dearest friends from dying naturally, they
slay them when they are old, and eat them. The Tiba-
reni hurl from rocks their nearest relatives, even while

4 Vid. Diod, Sic. lib. ii, $2.

168 ON ABSTINENCE FROM

living, when they are old. And with respect to the Hyr-
cani and Caspii, the one exposed the living, but the other
the dead, to be devoured by birds and dogs. But the
Scythians bury the living with the dead, and cut their
throats on the pyres of the dead by whom they were
especially beloved. The Bactrii likewise cast those
among them that are old, even while living, to the dags.
And Stasanor, who was one of Alexander’s prefects,
nearly lost his government through endeavouring to
destroy this custom. As, however, we do not on account
of these examples subvert mildness of conduct towardg
men, so neither should we imitate thase nations that feed
on flesh through necessity, but we should rather imitate
the pious, and those who consecrate themselves to the
Gods. For Democrates* says, that to live badly, and not
prudently, temperately, and piously, is not to live ja
reality‘, but to die for a long time.

22. It now remains that we should adduce a few
examples of certain individuals, as testimonies in fayeur
of abstinence from animal food. For the want of these
was one of the accusations which were urged against yg,
We learn, therefore, that Triptolemus was the nyogt
ancient of the Athenian legislators; of whom Hers
mippus, in the second book of his treatise on Legislators,
writes as follows: “ It 18 said, that Triptolemys esta-
blished laws for the Athenians. And the philosapher
Xenocrates asserts, that three of his laws still remain
in Eleusis, which are these, Honour your parents; Sq.
crifice to the Gods from the fruits of the earth ; Injare
not animals.” Two of these, therefore, he says, are

© Reisk says, that he does not know who this Democrates 15) bas
there can, I think, be no doubt of its being the Pythagorean of thag
name, whose Golden Sentences are extant in the Opuscula Mythologicn
of Gale, of which see Mr. Bridgman’s translation. _

f In the original, ov xaxwe Cov eves, But for ov κακῶς, I read,
οὐκ ovr. For without this emendation, Democrates will ¢ontradies
himself.

© This Hermippus is also cited by Diogenes Laertius in Pyth.

ANIMAL FOQD,—BOOK IV. 169

properly instituted. For it is necessary that we should
as much as possible recompense our parents for the
benefits which they have conferred on us; and that
we should offer to the Gods the first-fruits of the
things useful to our life, which they have imparted to
us. But with respect to the third law, he is dubious
as to the intention of Triptolemus, in ordering the Athe-
nians te abstain from animals. Was it, says he, because
he thought it was a dire thing to slay kindred natures,
or because he perceived it would happen, that the most
useful animals would be destroyed by men for food?
Wishing, therefore, to make our life as mild as possible,
he endeavoured to preserve those animals that associate
with men, and which are especially tame. Unless, in-
deed, because having ordained that men should honour
the Gods by offering to them first-fruits, he therefore
added this third law, conceiving that this mode of wor-
ship would continue for a longer time, if sacrifices
through animals were not made to the Gods. But as
many other causes, though not very accurate, of the pro-
mulgation of these laws, are assigned by Xenocrates,
thus much from what has been said is sufficient for our
purpose, that abstinence from animals was one of the
legal institutes of Triptolemus. Hence, those who after-
wards violated this law, being compelled by great neces-
sity, and involuntary errors, fell, as we have shown,
into this custom of slaughtering and eating animals.
The following, also, is mentioned as a law of Draco:
“‘ Let this be an eternal sacred law" to the inhabitants
of Attica, and let its authority be predominant for
ever; viz. that the Gods, and indigenous Heroes, be
worshipped publicly, conformably to the laws of the
country, delivered by our ancestors ; and also, that they
he worshipped privately, according to the ability of each
individual, in conjunction with auspicious words, the

δ In the original, θεσμος, which, as we are informed by Proclus,
signifies devine order, and a uniform boundary.

170 ON ABSTINENCE, &c.

firstlings of fruits, and annual cakes. So that this law
ordains, that divinity should be venerated by the first
offerings of fruits which are used by men, and cakes
made of the fine flour of wheat.

' This book is evidently imperfect, because there are wanting at
the end examples of illustrious Greeks and Romans, who, from the
most remote antiquity, abstained from animal food. And this was also
obvious to Reisk.

ΟΝ

THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS,

IN THE

THIRTEENTH BOOK OF THE ODYSSEY.

ee ee ee ey

1, Wuatr does Homer obscurely signify by the cave m
Ithaca, which he describes in the following verses ?

“‘ High at the head a branching olive grows,
And crowns the pointed cliffs with shady boughs.
A cavern pleasant, though involv’d in night,

- Beneath it lies, the Naiades’ delight :
Where bowls and urns of workmanship divine
And massy beams in native marble shine ;
On which the Nymphs amazing webs display,
Of purple hue, and exquisite array.
The busy bees within the urns secure
Honey delicious, and like nectar pure.
Perpetual waters through the grotto glide,
A lofty gate unfolds on either side;
That to the north is pervious to mankind ;
The sacred south t’ immortals is consign’d.”

That the poet, indeed, does not narrate these particulars
from historical information, is evident from this, that
those who have given us a description of the island,
have, as Cronius* says, made no mention of such a cave
being found in it. This likewise, says he, is manifest,
that it would be absurd for Homer to expect, that in

Δ This Cronius, the Pythagorean, is also mentioned by Porphyry, in
lis Life of Plotinus.

Ae

172 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

describing a cave fabricated merely by poetical license,
and thus artificially opening a path to Gods and men
in the region of Ithaca, he should gain the belief of man-
kind. And it is equally absurd to suppose, that nature
herself should point out, in this place, one path for the
descent of all mankind, and again another path for all the
Gods. For, indeed, the whole world is full of Gods and
men: but it is impossible to be persuaded, that in the
Ithacensian cave men descend, and Gods ascend. Cro-

“nius, therefore, having premised thus much, says, that it

is evident, not only to the wise but also to the vulgar,
that the poet, under the veil of allegory, conceals some
mysterious signification; thus compelling others to ex-
plore what the gate of men is, and also what is the gate
of the Gods: what he means by asserting that this cave
of the Nymphs has two gates; and why it is both pleasant
and obscure, since darkness is by no means delightéul,
but is rather productive of aversion dnd horror, Like-
wise, what is the reason why it is not simply said to
be the cave of the Nymphs, but it is accurately added,
of the Nymphs which are called Naiades? Why, also, is
the cave represented as containing bowls and amphore,
when no mention is made of their receiving any liquor,
but ‘bees are said to deposit their honey in these vessels
asin hives? Then, again, why are oblong beams adapted
to weaving placed here for the Nymphs; and these not
formed from wood, or any other pliable matter; but from
stone, as well.as the amphore and bowls? Which last
circumstance is, indeed, less obscure; but that, on these
stony beams, the Nymphs should weave purple garments,
is not only wonderful to the sight, but also to the auditory
sense. For who would believe that Goddesses weave
garments in 8 cave mvolved in darkness, and on stony
beams, especially while he hears the poet asserting, that
the purple webs of the Goddesses were visible. Im
addition to these things likewise, this is admirable, that
the cave should have a twofold entrance ; one made for
the descent of men, but the other for the ascent of Gods.

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 173

And again, that the gate, which is pervious by men,
᾿ς ghould be said to be turned towards the north wind, bat
Ὁ the portal of the Gods to the south; and why the poet
‘did not rather make use of the west and the east for this
- purpose; since nearly all temples have their statues and
᾿ entrances turned towards the east; but those who enter
_ them look towards the west, when standing with their
faces turned towards the statues, they honour and worship
the Gods. Hence, since this narration is full of such
* cbecurities, it can neither be a fiction casually devised for
the purpose .of procuring delight, nor an exposition of
ἃ topical history; but something allegorical must be
indicated in it by the poet, who likewise mystically places
_an olive near the cave. All which particulars the ancients
thought very laborious to investigate and unfold; and
we, with their assistance, shall now endeavour to develope
the secret meaning of the allegory. Those persons, there-
fore, appear to have written very negligently about the
situation of the place, who think that the cave, and what
is narrated concerning it, are nothing more than a fiction
of the poet. But the best and most accurate wniters of
geography, and among these Artemiderus the Ephesian,
in the fifth book of his work, which consists of eleven
books, thus writes: “ The island of Ithaca, containing an
extent of eighty-five stadia’, is distant from Panormus,
a port of Cephalenia, about twelve stadia. It has a port
named Phorcys, in which there is a shore, and on that
shore a cave, in which the Pheacians are reported to have
placed Ulysses.” This cave, therefore, will not be entirely
an Homeric fiction. But whether the poet describes it
as it really is, or whether he hes added something to it of
his own invention, nevertheless the same inquiries remain ;
whether the intention of the poet is mvestigated, or of
those who founded the cave. For, neither did the
ancients establish temples without fabulous symbols, nor

» 4, 6. Rather more than ten Italian miles and a half, erent stadia
making an Italian mile.

174 ΟΝ THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS:

does Homer rashly narrate the particulars pertaining to
things of this kind. But how much the more any one
endeavours to show that this description of the cave
is not an Homeric fiction, but prior to Homer was conse-
crated to the Gods, by so much the more will this conse-
crated cave be found to be full of ancient wisdom. And.
on this account it deserves to be investigated, and it is
requisite that its symbolical consecration should be amply
unfolded into light.

# 2. The ancients, indeed, very properly consecrated a

ew aa 4’ “τ

we tne

« eave to the world, whether assumed collectively, accord-

ing to the whole of itself, or separately, according to its
parts. Hence they considered earth as a symbol of that
matter of which the world consists; on which account
some thought that matter and earth are the same;
through the cave indicating the world, which was gene-
rated from matter. For caves are, for the most part,
spontaneous productions, and connascent with the earth,
being comprehended by one uniform mass of stone; the
interior parts of which are concave, but the exterior parts
are extended over an indefinite portion of land. And the
world being spontaneously produced, [. 6. being produced
by no external, but from an internal cause,] and being
also self-adherent, is allied to matter; which, according
to a secret signification, is denominated a stone and a
rock, on account of its sluggish and repercussive nature.
with respect to form: the. ancients, at the-same time,
asserting that matter is infinite through its privation of

— Since, however, it is continually flowing, and is
of itself destitute of the supervening investments : of form;

ἱ through which it participates of morphe®, and becomes .
_ visible, the flowing waters, darkness, or, as the poet says,
: obscurity of the cavern, were considered by the ancients

as apt symbols of what the world contains, on account of
the matter with which it is connected. Through matter,

¢ In the original, & ov μορφουται, But morphe, as we are informed by
Simplicius, pertains to the colour, figure, and magnitude of superficies. .,.

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 175

“therefore, the world is obscure and dark; but through

” the connecting power, and orderly distribution of form,
from which also it is called world, it is beautiful and
delightful. Hence it may very properly be denominated
a cave; as being lovely, indeed, to him who first enters
into it, through its participation of forms, but obscure
to him who surveys its foundation, and examines it with
an intellectual eye. So that its exterior and superficial
. parts, indeed, are pleasant, but its interior and profound
parts are obscure, [and its very bottom is darkness itself].
Thus also the Persians, mystically signifying the descent
of the soul into the sublunary regions, and its regression
from it, initiate the mystic [or him who is admitted to the
arcane sacred rites] in a place which they denominate
a cavern, For, as Eubulus says, Zoroaster was the first .
who consecrated,.in the. neighbouring. mountains of Per-
sia, ἃ spontaneously produced cave, florid, and | having
fountains, in honour « of Mithra, the maker ‘and father of
all things; a cave, according to Zoroaster, bearing, a
reséniblance οὗ -the--world, which - was” “fabricated © “by.
‘Mithra. But the things contained in the cavern being
arranged according to commensurate intervals, were
symbols of the mundane elements and climates.

3. After this Zoroaster likewise, it was usual with
others to perform the rites pertaining to the mysteries in
caverns and dens, whether spontaneously. produced, or
made by the hands. For, as they established temples,

groves, and altars, to the celestial Gods, but to the ~~

terrestrial Gods, and to heroes, altars alone, and to the
subterranean divinities pits and cells; so to the world
they dedicated caves and dens; as likewise to Nymphs,
on account of the water which trickles, or is diffused -in
caverns, over which the Naiades, as we shallshortly observe,

. 4 “ Nymphs,” says Hermias, in his Scholia on the Phedrus of Plato,
“‘ are Goddesses who preside over regeneration, and are ministrant to
Bacchus, the offspring of Semele. Hence they dwell near water, that is,
they are conversant with generation. But this Bacchus smpplies the
regeneration of the whole sensible world.”

176 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

preside. Not only, however, did the ancients take a
/ cavern, as we have said, to be a symbol of the νοῦ, ‘ot
of a generated and sensible nature; but they also assutwed
~~ 88 a symbol of all invisible powers; because, as caxvérra
are obscure and dark, so the essence of these powers
\ is occult. Hence Saturn fabricated a cavern in the ocean
itself, and concealed in it his children. Thus, too, Ceres
educated Proserpine, with her Nymphs, in ἃ ¢avé; and
many other particulars of this kind may be found in the
writings of theologists. But that the ancients dedicated
. eaverns to Nymphs, and especially to the Naiades, whe
dwelt near fountains, and who are called Naiades froma the
atreams over which they preside, is manifest from the
hymn to Apollo, in which it is said: “ ‘The Nytapha™
residing in’ caves ‘shall. deduce fountaina. of intellectual .
waters to thee, (according to the divine. veiee-of~the
ὸὶ Muses,) which are the progeny | of 8 terrene spirit, Heage
‘waters, butsting through every river, shall exhibie ¢6
mankind perpetiial effusions of sweet streams*.—Prom
hence, as it appears to me, the Pythagoréans; and ater
‘@i¢m Plato; showed that the world is a cavertt-and ἀ daa.
For the powers which are the leaders of souls, thas spoalt
in a verse of Empedocles:

Now at this secret cavern we’re arrived.

And by Plato, in the 7th book of his Republic, it is said,
“ Behold men as if dwelling in a subterraneous cavern,
and in a den-like habitation, whose entrance is widely
expanded to the admission of the light through the whole
cave.” But when the other person in the Dialogue says,
“ You adduce an unusual and wonderful similitude,” he
replies, “‘ The whole of this image, friend Glauco, must
be adapted to what has been before said, assimilating this
receptacle, which is visible through the sight, to the
habitation of a prison; but the light of the fire which is
in it to the power of the sun.”

4 These lines are not to be found in any of the hymns now extant,.
ascribed to Homer.

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 177

4. That theologists therefore considered caverns as
symbols of the world, and of mundane powers, is, through
this, manifest. And it has been already observed by us,
that they also considered a cave as a symbol. of the ©
intelligible essence; being impelled to do so by differ-
ent and not the same conceptions. For they were οὗ"
Opinion, that a cave is a symbol of the sensible world,
because caverns are dark, stony, and humid; and they
asserted, that the world is a thing of this kind, through
the matter of which it consists, and through its reper- —
cussive and flowing nature. But they thought it to be a
symbol of the intelligible world, because that world 18
invisible to sensible perception, and possesses a firm and
stable essence. Thus, also, partial powers are unappa-
rent, and especially those which are inherent in matter.
For they formed these symbols, from surveying the
spontaneous production of caves, and their nocturnal,
dark, and stony nature; and not entirely, as some suspect,
from directing their attention to the figure of a cavern.

_ For every cave is not spherical, as is evident from this
Homeric cave with a twofold entrance. But since a
cavern has a twofold similitude, the present cave must
not be assumed as an image of the intelligible, but of the ~
Sensible essence. For in consequence of containing per-

“ petually-flowing streams of water, it will not be a symbol

of an intelligible hypostasis, but of a material essence. ~
On this account also, it is sacred to Nymphs, not the
mountain, or rural‘ Nymphs, or others of the like kind,
but to the Naiades, who are thus denominated from streams

of water. For we peculiarly call the Naiades, and the>
powers that preside over waters, Nymphs; and this /
term, also, is commonly applied to all souls descending into‘
generation. For the ancients thought that these souls are
incumbent on water which is inspired by divinity, as Nu-
menius, says, who adds, that on this account, a propheg”
asserts, that the Spirit of God moved on the waters. The ~

‘ In the original, ots ἀχραίων; but for argain, I read, αγραίων.
N

178 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

Egyptians likewise, on thia account, represent all demons,
and also the sun, and, in short, all the planets 5, not standing
on any thing solid, but on a sailing vessel; for soule
descending into generation fly to moisture. Hence, also,
Heraclitus says, “ that moisture appeara delightful aad
not deadly to souls;” but the lapse into generation 18
delightful to them. And in another place [speaking of
unembodied souls], he says, ‘“‘ We live their death, and
we die their life.” Hence the poet calls those that are
HI generation humid, because they have souls which are
profoundly steeped in moisture. On this account, such
souls delight in blood and humid seed; but water is the
nutriment of the souls of plants. Some likewise are of
epinian, that the bodies in the air, and in the heavena,
are nourished by vapours from fountains and rivers, and
other exhalations. But the Stoics assert, that the sun is-
nourished by the exhalation from the sea; the.moon from.
the vapours of fountains and rivers.;. and the stars from.
the exhalation of the earth. Hence, according to them,
the sun is an intellectual composition formed from the
sea; the moon from river waters; and the stars from
terrene exhalations. .

δ. It is necessary, therefore, that souls, whether.
they are corporeal or incorporeal, while they attract to
themselves body, and especially such as are about to be
᾿ bound to blood and moist bodies, should verge to hu-
midity, and be corporalized, in- consequence of being
drenched in moisture. Hence the souls of the dead. ane
evocated by the effusion of bile and blood ; and souls

§ In the original, τοὺς TE Αἰγυπτίους δια τοῦτο τοὺς δαίμονας ἁπαγτὰς οὐχ
ἔσταγαι ἔστι στέρεου, ἀλλα πάντας ἔπι WAokov, καὶ Tov ἥλιον, Καὶ ἀπλος αντάς, ove
moves εἰδέναι xen τὰς ψυχας επιποτωμέγας τῷ υγρῷ, τας εἰς γένεσιν κατιουσας, But
after the words xa: απλως πάντας, it appears to me to be requisite to insext
σοὺς whamrag, For Martianus Capella, in lib. ii. De Nuptiis Philologie,
speaking of the sun, says: “ Ibi quandam navim, totius nature cursibus
diversa cupiditate moderantem, cuuctaque flammarum congestione ple-
nissimam, beatis circumactam mercibus conspicatur. Cui naute septem
germani, tamen suique consimiles presidebant,” &c. For in this passage
- the seven sailors. are evidently, the seven planets.

Ι!

-

--

ΟΝ THE CAVE OF THE ΚΥΜΡΗΞΒ. 179

that are lovers of body, by attracting a moist spirit, con-
dense this humid vehicle like a cloud. _ For moisture con-
densed in the air constitutes.a cloud. But the pneumatic:
vehicle: being: condensed: πὶ these souls, becomes visible
through an excess of moisture. And among the number
of these we tfiust reckOW those apparitions of images,
which, from a spirit coloured by the fifluence ofimepina-
tion, present themselves:to mankind. But pure souls ar&
averse from generation ; so that, a9 Heraclitus says, “a
dry soul ts the wisest.” Hence, here also, the spirit becomes
moist and more equeous through the desire of coition,
the soul thus attracting ἃ humid vapour from verging to
generation. Souls, therefore, proceeding into generation.
are the Nymphs called Naiades. Hence it is usual to call;
these that are married Nymphs, as being conjomed to
generation, and to pour water into baths from fountains,
ov rivers, or perpetual rills.

6. This world, then, is sacred and pleasant to soule
who have now proceeded into nature, and to. nate
demons, though it is essentially dark and obscure ; [περοειδὰς}
from which some have suspected: that souls also. are of ar
obseure nature, [aepudas,} and essentially consist of ‘air:
Hence ἃ cavern, which is both pleasant and dark, will be
appropriately consecrated to souls ‘on the earth, con+
formably to its similitude to the world; in which, as in
the greatest ofall temples, souls reside. To the Nymphs
likewise, who preside over waters, a cavern, in which
there are perpetually flowing streams, is adapted. Let,
therefore, this present cavern be consecrated to: souls; —
and, among the more partial powers, to nymphs, that
preside over streams and fountains, and who, on this
account, are called fontal and Natades. What, therefore,
are the different symbols, some of which are-adapted to
souls, but others to the aquatic powers, in order that we
may apprehend that this cavern is consecrated in common
to both? Let the stony bowls, then, and the amphore,
be symbels of the aquatic Nymphs. . For these are,
indeed, the symbols of Bacchus, but their composition is

180 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS,

fictile, i. e. consists of baked earth; and these are
friendly to the vine, the gift of the God ; since the fruit
df the vine is brought to a proper maturity ‘by the celestial
fire of the sun. But the stony bowls and amphora, aie
in the most eminent degree adapted to the Nymphs who
preside over the water that flows from rocks. And to
souls that descend into generation, ‘and are occupied in
corporeal energies, what symbol can be more appropriate

V than those instruments pertaining to weaving? Hence,

also, the poet ventures to say, “ that on these the
Nymphs weave purple webs, admirable to the view.” ‘For
the formation of the flesh is on and about the bones,
which in the bodies of animals resemble stones. Hence
tliese instruments of weaving consist of stone, and not of
any other matter. But the purple webs will evidently be
the flesh which is woven from the blood. For purple
woollen garments are tinged from blood; and wool is
dyed from animal juice. The generation of flesh, also, is
through and from blood. Add, too, that the body is
@ garment with which the soul is invested, .a thing
wonderful to the sight, whether this refers to the compo-
sition of the soul, or contributes to the colligation of the
soul [to the whole of a visible essence]. Thus, also,
Proserpine, who is the inspective guardian of every thing
produced from seed, is represented by Orpheus as weav-
ing a web"; and the heavens are called by the ancients.

. © The theological meaning οἵ this Orphic fiction is beautifully un-
folded by Proclus, as follows:—‘ Orpheus says that the vivific cause
of partible natures [i. 6. Proserpine], while she remained on high, weav-
ing the order of celestials, was a nymph, as being undefiled ; andjn con-

_ sequence of this connected with Jupiter, and abiding in her appropriate
_ manners ; but that, proceeding from her proper habitation, she left her
_ webs unfinished, was ravished ; having been ravished, was married; and

that being married she generated, in order that she might animate things
which have an adventitious life. For the unfinished state of her webs
indicates, I think, that the universe is imperfect or unfinished, as far as
to perpetual animals [i. e. The universe would be imperfect if nothing

_ inferior to the celestial Gods was produced]. Hence Plato says, that
the one Demiurgus calls on the many’ Demiurgi to weave together the

-ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 18]

a veil, in consequence of being, as it were, the vestment
of the celestial Gods.

7. Why, therefore, are the amphore said not to be
filled with water, but with honey-combs? For in these’
Homer says the bees deposit their honey. But this is
evident from the word τιϑαιδωσσειν, which signifies τιϑεναι
τὴν foow; ἃ. 6. to deposit aliment. And honey is the
nutriment of bees. Theologists, also, have made honey
subservient to many and different symbols, because it
consists of many powers; since it is both cathartic and
preservative. Hence, through honey, bodies are pre-,
served from putrefaction, and inveterate ulcers are puri-
fied. Farther still, it is also sweet to the taste, and is
collected by bees, who are ox-begotten, from flowers.
When, therefore, those who are initiated in the Leontic
sacred rites, pour honey instead of water on their hands ;
they are ordered [by the initiator] to have their hands
pure from every thing productive of molestation, and
from every thing noxious and detestable. Other initiators
[into the same mysteries] employ fire, which is of a
cathartic nature, as an appropriate purification. And
they likewise purify the tongue from all the defilement of
evil with honey. But the Persians, when they offer
honey to the guardian of fruits, consider it as the symbol
of a preserving and defending power. Hence some per-

mortal and immortal natures; after a manner reminding us, that the
addition of the mortal genera is the perfection of the textorial life of the
universe, and also exciting our recollection of the divine Orphic fable,
and affordin us interpretative causes of the unfinished webs of Proser-
pine.” — See vol. ii. p. 356, of my translation of Proclus on the Timzus.
The unfinished webs of Proserpine are also alluded to by Claudian,

in his poem De Raptu Proserpina, in the following verse :

Sensit adesse Deas, imperfectumque laborem

Deserit.

I only add, that, by ancient theologists, the shuttle was considered as
a signature of separating, a cup of vivific, a sceptre of ruling, and a Key
of guardian power.

182 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

sons have thought that the nectar.and ambrosia’, which
the poet pours into the nostrils of the dead, ‘for the
purpose of preventing putrefaction, is honey ; since honey
is the food of the Gods. On éhis acceunt, also, the same
poet somewhere calls nectar sguégev; for such is the colour
of honey, [viz. it is a deep yellow]. But whether or not
honey is to be taken for nectar, we shall elsewhere ‘more
accurately examine. In QOrspheus, likewise, Saturn is
ensnared by Jupiter through honey. For Saturn, being
filled with honey, is intoxicated, his. senses are darkened,
as if from the effects of wine, and -he sleeps; just as
Porus, in the Banquet of Plato, is filled ‘with nectar; for
wine was not (says he) yet known. The Goddess Night,

! The theological meaning of nectar and ambrosia, is beautifully
unfolded by Hermias, in his Scholia on the Phedrus of Plato, published
by Ast, Lips. 1810, p. 145, where he informs us, “ that ambrosia is
analogous to dry nutrimeut, and that, on this aocount, it signifies an
astablishment in causes; but-that nectar is analogous to moist food, and
that it signifies the providential attention of the Gods to secondary
natures; the former being denominated, according to @ privation of the
mortal and corruptible [xara ovegnsw τοῦ βροτοῦ καὶ φϑαρτου] ; but the latter,
according to ἃ privation of the funeral and sepulchrul [κατὰ oreguom
We xiseging δίρημενον καὶ τοῦ rage], And when ‘the Gods are represented ‘as
energizing -providentially, they are said to drink nectar. Thus Homer,
in the beginning ofthe 4th book of.the Hliad:

Os δὲ θεοι wag Ζενι safeycercs γοροωγα
Χρυσεω εν δαπεδω, μετα δὲ σφισι ποτνια Ἠδη

Νεχταρ ἑωγοχοει" ros δὲ χρυσεοις δεπαξσσι
~
Δειδεχατ᾽ adandouc, Tema πολιν εἰσοροωντες.

Now with each other, on the golden floor
Seated near. Jove, the-Gods converse; to whom
The venerable Hebe nectar hears,

In golden goblets; and as these flow roand,
Th’ immortals turn their careful eyes on Troy.

For then they providentially attend to the Trojans. The possession,
therefore, of immutable providence by the Gods is signified by their
drinking nectar; the exextion ‘of this previdence, by their bebolding
Troy; and their communicating with each other in providential energies,
by receiving the goblets from each other.

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 183

too, in Orpheus, advises Jupiter to make use of honey as
an artifice. ‘For she says to him — :

When stretch’d beneath the lofty oaks you view
Saturn, with honey by the bees produc’d,
Sunk in ebriety *, fast bind the God.

This, therefore, takes place, and Saturn being bound,
is castrated in the same manner as Heaven; the theolo-
gist obscurely signifying by this, that divine natures
become through pleasure bound, and drawn down into
the realms of generation; and also that, when dissolved
in pleasure, they emit certain seminal powers. Hence
Saturn castrates Heaven, when descending to earth,
through a desire of coition'. But the sweetness of
honey signifies, with theologists, the same thing as the
pleasure arising from copulation, by which Saturn, being
ensnared, was castrated. For Saturn, and his sphere,
are the first of the orbs that move contrary to the course
of Ccelum, or the heavens. Certain powers, however,
descend both from Heaven [or the merratic sphere] and
the planets. But Saturn receives the powers of Heaven,

k Ebriety, when ascribed to divine natures by ancient theologists,
signifies a deific superessential energy, or an energy superior to intellect.
Hence, when Saturn is said by Orpheus to have been intoxicated with
honey or nectar, the meaning is, that he then energized providentially, in
a deific and super-intellectual manner. |

1 Porphyry, though he excelled in philosophical, was deficient in theo-
logical knowledge ; of which what he now says of the castrations of Saturn
and Heaven, is a remarkable instance. For ancient theologists, by things
preternatural, adumbrated the transcendent nature of the Gods; by
such as are irrational, a power more divine than all reason; and by
things apparently base, incorporeal beauty. Hence, in the fabulous
narrations to which Porphyry now alludes, the genital perts must be
considered as symbols of prolific power; and the castration of these
parts as signifying the progression of this power into a subject order-
So that the fable means that the prolific powers of Saturn are called
forth into progression by Jupiter, and those of Heaven by Saturn;
Jupiter being inferior to Saturn, and Saturn to Heaven.—See the
Apology for the Fables of Homer, in vol. i. of my translation of Plato.

(al

184 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

and Jupiter the powers of Saturn. Since, therefore, honey
is assumed in purgations, and as an antidote to putre-
faction, and is indicative of the pleasure which draws.
souls downward to generation; it is a symbol well
adapted to aquatic Nymphs, on account of the unpu-
trescent nature of the waters over which they preside,
their purifying power, and their co-operation with genera-
tion For water co-operates in the work of generation.
On this account the bees are said, by the poet, to deposit
their honey in bowls and amphore; the bowls being
a symbol of fountains, and therefore a bowl is placed
near to Mithra, instead of a fountain; but the amphoree
are symbols of the vessels with which we draw water
from fountains. And fountains and streams are adapted
to aquatic Nymphs, and still more so to the Nymphs that
are souls, which the ancients peculiarly called bees, as
the efficient causes of sweetness. Hence Sophocles does.
not speak unappropriately when he says of souls —

In swarms while wandering, from the dead,
A. humming sound is heard.

8. The priestesses of Ceres, also, as being initiated
into the mysteries of the terrene Goddess, were called by
the ancients bees; and Proserpine herself was denomi-
nated by them honied. The moon, likewise, who presides
over generation, was called by them a bee, and algo
a bull. And Taurus is thé exaltation of the moon. But
bees are ox-begotten.. And this appellation is also given
to souls proceeding into generation. The God, likewise,
who is occultly connected with generation, is a stealer of
oxen. To which may be added, that honey is considered
as a symbol of death, and on this account, it is usual to
offer libations of honey to the terrestrial Gods; but gall
18 considered as a symbol of life ; whether it is obscurely
signified by this, that the life of the soul dies through
pleasure, but through bitterness the soul resumes its life, -
whence, also, bile is sacrificed to the Gods; or whether it
is, because death liberates from molestation, but the pre-

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS: 185

sent life is laborious and bitter. All souls, however,
proceeding into generation, are not simply called bees,
but those who will live in it justly, and who, after having
performed such things as are acceptable to the Gods, will
again return [to their kindred stars]. For this insect
loves to return to the place from whience it first came,
and is eminently just and sober. Whence, also, the liba-
tions which are made with honey are called sober. Bees,
likewise, do not sit on beans, which were considered by
the ancients as a symbol of generation proceeding in a
right liné, and without flexure; because this leguminous
vegetable is almost the only seed-bearing plant, whose
stalk is perforated throughout without any intervening
knots™. We must therefore admit, that honey-combs
and beeg are appropriate and common symbols of the
aquatic Nymphs, and of souls that are married [as it
were] to [the humid and fluctuating nature of] gene-
ration.

9. Caves, therefore, in the most remote periods of
‘antiquity, were consecrated to the Gods, before temples
were erected to them. Hence, the Curetes in Crete
dedicated a cavern ‘to Jupiter; in Arcadia, a cave was
sacred to the Moon, and to Lycean Pan; and in Naxus,
to Bacchus. But wherever Mithra was known, they pro-
pitiated the God in a cavern. With respect, however, to
this Ithacensian cave, Homer was not satisfied with
saying that it had two gates, but adds, that one of ‘the
gates was turned towards the north, but the other, which
was more divine, to the south. He also says, that the
northern gate was pervious to descent, but does not indi-
cate whether this was also the case with the southern
gate. For of this, he only says, “ It is inaccessible to
men, but it is the path of the immortals.”

10. It remains, therefore, to investigate what is indi-

™ Hence, when Pythagoras exhorted his disciples to abstain from
beans, he intended to signify, that they should beware of a continued and
perpetual descent into the realms of generation.

186 ΟΝ THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

cated by this narration, whether the poet describes a
cavern which was in reality consecrated -by othera, or
whether it is an enigma of his own invention. Sinoe,
however, a cavern is an image and symbol of the world,
2s Numenius and his familiar Cronius assert, there are
two extremities in the heavens, viz. the winter tropic, than
which nothing is more southern, and the summer tropic,
than which nothing is more northern. But the summer
tropic is in Cancer, and the winter tropic in Capricorn.
And since Cancer is nearest to us, it is very properly attri-
buted to the Moon, which is the nearest of all the heavenly
bodies to the earth. But as the southern pole, by its
great distance, is invisible to us, hence Capricorn is attri-
buted to Saturn, the highest and most remote of all
the planets. Again, the signs from Cancer to Capricorn,
are situated in the following order: and the first of these
is Leo, which is the house of the Sun; afterwards Virgo,
which is the house of Mercury; Libra, the house of
Venus; Scorpius, of Mars; Sagittarius, of Jupiter; and
Capricornus, of Saturn. But from Capricorn in an inverse
order, Aquarius is attributed to Saturn; Pisces, to Jupi-
ter; Aries, to Mars; Taurus, to Venus; Gemini, to Mer-
cury ; and, in the last place, Cancer to the Moon.

11. Theologists therefore assert, that these two gates
are Cancer and Capricorn; but Plato calls them en-
frances. And of these, -theologists say, that Cancer is
the gate through which souls descend; but Capricorn |
that throngh which they ascend. Cancer is indeed
northern, and adapted to descent ; but:Capricorn is south-
em, and adapted to ascent". The northern parts, like-

5 Macrobius, in the 12th chapter of his Commentary on Scipio's
Dream, has derived some of the ancient arcana which it contains from
what is here said by Porphyry. A part of what he has farther added, I
shall translate, on account of its excellence and connexion with the
above passage. ‘‘ Pythagoras thought that the empire of Pluto began
downwards from the milky way, because souls falling from thence
appear to have already receded from the Gods. Hence he asserts, that.
the nutriment of milk is first ofered to infants, because their first motion

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 187

wise, pertain ‘to souls descending iato generation. And
the gates of the cavern which are turned προ the north, are

commences from the galaxy, when they begin to fall into terrene bodies.
Qn this account, since those who are about to descend are yet in
Cancer, and have not left the milky way, they rank in the order of the
Gods. But when, by falling, they arrive at the Lion, in this constélla-
tion they enter on the exordium of their future condition. And because,
in the Lion, the rudiments of birth, and certain primary exercises
of human nature, commence ; but Aquarius is opposite to the Lion, and
presently sets after the Zion rises; hence, when the sun is in Aquarius,
funeral rites are performed to departed souls, because he is then carried
in a sign which is contrary or adverse to human life. From the confine,
therefore, in which the zodiac and galaxy touch each other, the soul,
descending from a round figure, which is the only divine form, is pro~
duced into a cone by its defluxion. And as a line is generated from a
point, and proceeds into length from an indivisible, so the soul, from its
own point, which is a monad, passes into the duad, which is the first
extension. And this is the essence which Plato, in the Timeus, calls
impartible, and at the same time partible, when he speaks of the nature of
the mundane soul. For as the soul of the world, so likewise that of man,
will be found to be in one respect without division, if the simplicity
of a divine nature is considered; and in another respect partible, if we
regard the diffusion of the former through the world, and of the latter
through the members of the body.

‘¢ As soon, therefore, as the soul gravitates towards body in this first
production of herself, she begins to experience a material tumult, that is,
matter flowing into her essence. And this is what Plato remarks in the
Phedo, that the soul is drawn into body staggering with recent intoxica-
tion ; signifying by this, the new drink of matter’s impetuous flood, through
which the soul, becoming defiled and heavy, is drawn into a terrene
situation. But the starry cup placed between Cancer and the Lion, is a
symbol of this mystic truth, signifying that descending souls first expe-
rience intoxication in that part of the heavens through the influx of
matter. Hence oblivion, the companion of .intoxication, there begins
silently to creep.into the recesses of the soul. For if souls retained in
their descent to bodies the memory of divine concerns, of which they
‘were conscious in the heavens, there would be no dissension among meu
about divinity. But all, indeed, in descending, drink af oblivion;
though some more, .and others less. On this account, though truth
3e not apparent to all men on the earth, yet all exercise their opinions
about it; because a defect of memory is the origin of opinien. But
these discover most who have drank least of oblivion, because they
easily remember what they had known before in the heavens.

188 ΟΝ FHE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

rightly said to be pervious to the descent of men; but
the southern gates are not the avenues of the Gods, but

“ The soul, therefore, falling with this first weight from the zodiac and
milky way into each of the subject spheres, is not only clothed with the
accession of a luminous body, but produces the particular motions which
it is to exercise in the respective orbs. Thus in Saturn, it energizes
according to a ratiocinative and intellective power; in the sphere
of Jove, according to a practic power ; in the orb of the Sun, according
to a sensitive and imaginative nature; but according to the motion |
of desire in the planet Venus; of pronouncing and interpreting what it
perceives in the orb of Mercury; and according to a plantal or vegetable
nature, and a power of acting on body, when it enters into the lunar
globe. And this sphere, as it is the last among the divine orders, so it
is the first in our terrene situation. For this body, as it is the dregs
of divine natures, so it is the first animal substance. And this is the
difference between terrene and supernal bodies (under the' latter of
which I comprehend the heavens, the stars, and the more elevated
elements,) that the latter are called upwards to be the seat of the soul,
and merit immortality from the very nature of the region, and an imita-
tion of sublimity ; but the soul is drawn down to these terrene bodies,
and is on this account said to die when it is enclosed in this fallen region,
and the seat of mortality. Nor ought it to cause any disturbance that
we have so often mentioned the death of the soul, which we have pro-
nounced to be immortal. For the soul is not extinguished by its own
proper death, but is only overwhelmed for a time. Nor does it lose the
benefit of perpetuity by its temporal demersion. Since, when it deserves —
to be purified from the contagion of vice, through its entire refinement
from body, it will bé restored to the light of perennial life, ahd will
return to its pristine integrity and perfection.”

‘‘ The powers, however, of the planets, which are the causes of
the energies of the soul in the several planetary spheres, are more
accurately described by Proclus, in p. 260 of his admirable Com-
mentary on the Timeus, as follows: ae δὲ Covas καὶ ers τῶν αγίέθων
Brayrnrey TEAnm μεν αἰτιά τοις ὥγητοῖς τὴς φυσεῶς, τὸ avrowloy ἄγαλμα oa
τῆς πηγαίας φυσεως" Hasog δὲ δημιουργος τῶν aiclnctav Ἰάσων, hors καὶ “τοῦ
opay καὶ τοῦ ὁρασϑαι asriog® Ἑρμης δὲ τῶν τὴς φαγτάσιας χιγησέων" αὐτῆς γα ΨῊς
φαντασήικης ουσιας, ὡς μίας ovens αἰσϑησεως και φαντασίας; ἥλιος ὑποστώτης" Adpelbrn
δὲ τῶν ἐπ ιθυμητικων ορδξβων' Αρῆς δὲ τῶν ϑυμοείδων κινήσεων τῶν κατὰ puoi ἐκασῆοες"
ποιγη “δὲ τῶν μὲν ζωτικὼν πάσων δυνάμεων Ζευς, τῶν δὲ γγωσΊικων Keovec, διηρται γαρ
“σαντα τὰ εἰδὴ Te ἀλογα εἰς ταυτας, ὃ, 6. “ If you are willing, also, you.may
say, that of the beneficent planets, the Moon is the cause to mortals of
nature, being herself the visible statue of fontal nature. But the Sur
is the: Demiurgus ‘of.every thing sensible, in consequence of. being the
cause of sight and visibility. Mercury is.the cause of the-motions of:the

-

‘

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 189

of souls ascending to the Gods.. On this account, the

poet does not say that they.are the avenues of the Gods,
but of immortals; this appellation being 8180 comman te
our souls, which are per se, or essentially, immortal. It 15.
said, that Parmenides mentions these two gates in his.
treatise On the. Nature of Things; as likewise, that they
are not unknown to the Romans and Egyptians. For
the Romans celebrate their Saturnalia when the.Sun is in
Capricorn; and during this festivity, slaves wear the
shoes of those that are free, and all things are.distributed
among them in’ common; the legislator obscurely signify-
ing by this ceremony, that through this gate of the
heavens, those who are now born slaves will be liberated
through the Saturnian festival, and the house attributed
to Saturn, i. e. Capricorn, when they live again, and
return to the fountain of life. Since, however, the path
from Capricorn is adapted to ascent®, hence the Romans
denominate that month in which the Sun, turning from
Capricorn ‘to the east, directs his course to the north,

Januarius, or January, from janua,a gate. But with the
Egyptians,’the beginning of the year is not Aquarius, as
with the Romans, but Cancer. For the star Sothis,
which the Greeks call the Dog, is near to Cancer. And
the rising of Sothis is the new moon with them, . this
being the principle of generation to the world. On this
account, the gates of the Homeric cavern are not dedi-
cated to the east and west, nor to the equinoctial signs,
Aries and Libra, but to the north and south, and to

those celestial signs which, towards the south, are most

southerly, and, towards the north, are most northerly ;

phantasy ; for of the imaginative essence itself, so far as sense and-phan-
tasy are one, the Sun is the producing cause. But Venus is the cause of
epithymetic appetites [or of the appetites pertaining to desire]; and
Mars, of the irascible metions which are conformable to nature. Of all
vital powers, however, Jupiter is the common cause ; but of all gnostic
powers, Saturn. For all the irrational forms are divided into these.”

© For’ καταξατικη, in this place, it appears to me to be obviously
necessary to read avaCazixe, For Porphyry. has above informed us, that
Capricorn is the gate through which souls ascend.

100 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

because this cave was sacred to souls and aquatic
Nymphs. But these places are adapted to souls descend--
ing into generatian, and sfterwards separating themselves
from it. Hence, a place near to the equinoctial circle
was assigned to Mithra as an. appropriate seat. And on
this account he bears the sword of Aries, whieh is
a martial sign. He is likewise carried in the Bull, whieh
is the sign of Venus. For Mithra, as well as the Bull, is
the demiurgus and lord of generation’. But.he is placed’
near the equinoetial circle, having the northers parts: on
his right hand, and the-southera on_his. left.. They like-
wise arranged towards the south the southern hemi+
sphere, because it is hot; but the northern hemisphere:
towards the north, through the coldness of the: nortl
12. The ancients, likewise, very reasonably connected
winds with. souls. proceeding into generation, and again
separating themselves from it, because, as some think,
souls attract a spirit, and: have a pneumatic.essence: But
the north wind is adapted: to souls: falling into genera-
tion’; and, on this account, the. northern blasts refresh
those whe are dying, and when they caa scarcely draw
. their breath. On the contrary, the southern gales dis-
solve life. For the north wind, indeed, from its superior
coldness, congeals [as it were, the animal life],, and
detains it in the frigidity of terrene generation. But the
south wind being hot, dissolves this life, and sends it
upward to the heat of a divine nature. Since, however,
eur terrene habitation is more northern, it is proper that
souls which are born in it should be familiar with the
north. wind ; but those that exchange this life for a better,
with the south wind. This also is the cause why the
north wind-is at its: commencement great ; but the south

P Hence Phanes, or Protogonus, who is the paradigm of the universe,
and who was absorbed by Jupiter, the Demiurgus, is represented: by
@rpheus as having the head of a bull’ among other lieads with which
he is adorned. And in the. Orphic hymn to him, he is called’ διεὶς
roarer. : . “ ἦ

ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 19] ©

wind, at its termination. For the former is situated
directly over the inhabitants of the northern part of the
globe; hut the latter is at a great distance from them;
and. the blast from places very remote, is more tardy than-
from such as are near. But when it is coacervated, then
it blows abundantly, and with vigour. Since, however,
souls proceed into. generation through the northern gate,
hence this wind. is said to be amatory. For, as the poet
says,

Boreas, enamour’d of the sprightly train,
€onceal’d his godhead in a flowing mane.

With voice dissembled, to his loves he περ ἃ,
And coursed the dappled. beauties o’er the mead :
Hence sprung twelve others. of unrivall’d kind,
Swift as their mother mares, and father wind 4.

It is also said, that Boreas ravished Orithya'’, from

4 Iliad, lib. xx. v. 493, &c.

* This fable is mentioned by Plato in the Phzdrus, and is beautifully
unfolded as follows, by Hermias, in his Scholia on that Dialogue: “ A
twofold solution may be given of this fable; one from history, more
ethical ; but the other, transferring us [from parts] to wholes. And
the former of these is as follows: Orithya was the daughter of Erectheus,
and the priestess of Boreas ; for each of the winds has a presiding deity,
which the telestic art, or the. art pertaining to sacred mysteries, reli-
giously cultivates. To this Orithya, then, the God was so very propi-
tious, that he sent the north wind for the safety of the country ; and’be-
aides this, he is said to have assisted the Athenians in their naval battles.
Orithya, therefore, becoming enthusiastic, being possessed by her proper
God Boreas, and no longer energizing as a human being (for animals
cease to energize according to their own peculiarities, when possessed
by superior causes), died under the inspiring influence, and thus was said
to have been ravished by Boreas. And this is the -more ethical explana-
tion of the fable. '

‘¢ But the second, which transfers the narration to wholes, and does
not entirely subvert the former, is the following: for divine fables often
employ transactions and histories, in subserviency to the discipline of

wholes. It is said then, that Erectheus is the God that rules over the
three elements, air, water, and earth. Sometimes, however, he is consi-
dered as alone the ruler of the earth, and sometimes as the presiding
deity of Attica alone. Of this deity Orithya is the daughter; and she
is the prolific power of the Earth, which is indeed coextended with the

192 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

whom he begot Zetis and Calais. But as the south
is attributed to the Gods, hence, when the Sun is at
his meridian, the curtains in temples are drawn hefore
the statues of the Gods; in consequence of observing the
Homeric precept, “ that it is not lawful for men to enter
temples when the Sun is inclined to the south;” for this
is the path of the immortals, Hence, when the God is at
his meridian altitude, the ancients placed a symbol of
mid-day and of the south in the gates of temples*; and,
on this account, in other gates also, it was not lawful
to speak at all times, because gates were considered
as sacred. Hence, too, the Pythagoreans, and the
wise men among the Egyptians, forbade speaking while
passing through doors or gates; for then they venerated

in silence that God who is the principle of wholes [and,
therefore of all things].

13. Homer likewise knew that gates are sacred, as is

word Erectheus, asthe unfolding: of the name signifies. For it is the.
prolific power of the Earth, flourishing and restored, according,to the
seasons. But Boreas is the providence of the Gods, supernally illumi-
nating secondary natures. For the providence of the Gods in the world
15. signified by Boreas, because this divinity blows from lofty places.
And the elevating power of the Gods is signified by the south wind, be-
cause this wind blows from low to lofty places ; and besides this, things
situated towards the south are more divine. The providence of the Gods,
therefore, causes the prolific power of the Earth, or of the Attic land, to
ascend, and become visible.

“ Orithya also may be said to be a soul aspiring after things above,
from ogeve and 4, according to the Attic custom of adding a letter
at the end of a word, which letter is here an “#.” Such a soul, there-
fore, is ravished by Boreas supernally blowing. But if Orithya. was
hurled from a precipice, this also is appropriate, for such a soul dies
a philosophic, not receiving a physical death, and abandons a.life per-
taining to her own deliberate choice, at the same time that she lives a
physical life. And philosophy, according to Socrates in the Phedo,
is nothing else than a meditation of death.”

5 In the original, trracay ovr καὶ συμθολον τὴς pesoneCgiag χαὶ TOU γοτοῦ, Bere
τῇ Supn, μεσημξριαζοντος του ϑέου, which Holstenius translates most errone-
ously as follows: “ Austrum igitur meridiei. symbolum statuunt ; cum
deus meridiano tempore ‘ostio immineat.”

΄σ

ON ΤΗΕ CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. κᾳι98

evident from his representing Oeneus, when supplicating,
shaking the gate:

The gates he shakes, and supplicates the son °.

He also knew the gates of the heavens which are com-
mitted to the guardianship of the Hours; which gates
originate in cloudy places, and are opened and shut by
the clouds. For he says,

Whether dense clouds they close, or wide unfold 5.

And on this account, these gates emit a bellowing
sound, because thunders roar through the clouds :

Heaven’s gates spontaneous open to the powers ;
Heaven’s bellowing portals, guarded by the Hours 7.

He likewise elsewhere speaks of the gates of the Sun,
signifying by these Cancer and Capricorn; for the Sun
proceeds as far as to these signs, when he descends from
the north to the south, and from thence ascends again to
the northern parts. But Capricorn and Cancer are situ-
ated about the galaxy, being allotted the extremities -
of this circle; Cancer, indeed, the northern, but Capri-
corn the southern extremity of it. According to Pytha-
goras, also, the people of dreams*, are the souls which are
said to be collected in the galaxy, this circle being
so called from the milk with which souls are nourished
when they fall into generation. Hence, those who evocate
departed souls, sacrifice to them by a libation of milk
mingled with honey; because, through the allurements
of sweetness, they will proceed into generation; with the
birth of man, milk being naturally produced. Farther
still, the southern regions produce small bodies ; for it is
usual with heat to attenuate them in the greatest degree.
But all bodies generated in the north are large, as is

4

" Thiad, lib. xi. v. 579. = Tliad, lib. vill. v. $95.

Y Tliad, lib. viii. v. 393.

* The souls of the suitors .are said by Homer, j in the 24th book of the
Odyssey (v. 11), to have passed, in their descent to the region of spirits,
beyond the people of dreams.

oO

~~

194 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

evident in the Celts, the Thracians, and the Scythitins ;

and these regions are humid, and abound with pastures.

For the word Boreas is derived from Boga, which signifies

nutriment. Hence, also, the wind which blows from

a land abounding in nutriment, is called Βορρας, as being

of a nutritive nature. From these causes, therefore, the

northern parts are adapted to the mortal tribe, and to

souls that fall into the realms of generation. But the

southern parts are adapted to that which is immortal®*,

just as the eastern parts of the world are attributed to the.
Gods, but the western to demons. For, in consequence

of nature originating from diversity, the ancients every

where made that which has a twofold entrance to be

a symbol of the nature of things. For the progression is

either through that which is intelligible, or through that

which is sensible. And if through that which is sensible,

10 is either through the sphere of the fixed stars, or

through the sphere of the planets. And again, it is éither

through an immortal, or through a mortal progression. |
One centre, likewise, is above, but the other beneath the
earth; and the one is eastern, but the other western.

Thus, too, some parts of the world are situated on the

left, but others on the right hand: and night is opposed

to day. On this account, also, harmony consists of, and —
proceeds» through contraries. Plato also says, that there
are two openings*, one of which affords a passage ‘to
souls ascending to the heavens, but the other to souls
descending to the earth. . And, according to theologists,
the Sun and Moon are the gates of souls, which ascend
through the Sun, and descend through the Moon. _ With
Homer, likewise, there are two tubs,

From which the lot of every one he fills,
Blessings to these, to those distributes ills ἃ,

5. Hence, the southern have always been more favourable to genius,
than the northern parts of the earth.

> In the original, τοξευει; but instead of it, I read sopeuts,

¢ ‘See my translation of the 10th book of hig Republic.

ἃ liad, xxiv. v. 528.

OM THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 195

But Plato, in the Gorgias, by tubs intends to signify
souls, some of which are malefic, but others beneficent,
aud some of which are rational, but others irrational®.

* The. passage in the Gorgias of Plato, to which Porphyry here alludes,
is as follows: —“ Soc. But, indeed, as you also say, life is a grievous
thing, For I should not wonder if Euripides spoke the truth when he
says: ‘ Who knows whether to live is not to die, and to die is not to
live?’ And we, perhaps, are in reality dead. For I have heard from
one of the wise, that we are now dead; and that the body is our
sepulchre; but that the part of the soul in which the desires are con-
tained, is of such a nature that it can be persuaded, and hurled upwards
and downwards. Hence a certain elegant man, perhaps a Sicilian,
or an Italian, denominated, mythologizing, this part of the soul a tub, by
a derivation from the probable and the persuasive; and, likewise, he
called those that are stupid, or deprived of intellect, uninitiated. He
farther said, that the intemperate and uncovered nature of that part of
the soul in which the desires are contained, was like a pierced tub,
through its insatiable greediness.”

What is here said by Plato is beautifully unfolded by Olympiodorus,
in his MS. Commentary on the Gorgias, as follows : —“ Euripides (in
Phryxo) says, that to live is to die, and to die to live. For the sou
coming hither, as she imparts life to the body, so she partakes [through
this] of a certain privation of life; but this is qn evil. When separated,
therefore, from the body, she lives in reality: for she dies here, through
participating a privation of life, because the body becomes the source of
evils. And hence it is necessary to subdue the body.

‘* But the meaning of the Pythagoric fable, which is here introduced
by Plato, is ‘this: We are said to be dead, because, as we have before
observed, we partake of a privation of life. The sepulchre which we
carry about with us is, as Plato himself explains it, the body. But
Hades is the unapparent, because we are situated in obscurity, the soul
being in a state of servitude to the body. The tubs are the desires ;
whether they are so called from our hastening to fill them, as if they
were tubs, or from desire persuading us that it is beautiful. The initiated,
therefore, 4. ¢. those that haye a perfect knowledge, pour into the entire
tab: for these have their tub full; or, in other words, have perfect
virtue. But.the uninitiated, vjz. those that possess nothing perfect, have
perforated tubs. For those that are in a state of servitude to desire
always wish to fill it, and are more inflamed; and on this accopnt they
haye perforated. tubs, as being never full. But the sieve is the rational
soul mingled with the irrational. For the [rational] soul is called
ὁ circle, becayse it seeks itself, and is itself sought; finds jtself, and is
itself found. But-the-isrational soul. ipitetes a right Jine, since. it dogs

-

196 ΟΝ THE-CAVE OF. ΤΗΕ ΝΥ ΜΡΗΒ.

Souls, however, are [analogous to] tubs, because they
contain in themselves energies and habits, as in a vessel.
In Hesiod too, we find one tub closed, but the other.
opened by Pleasure, who scatters its contents every
where, Hope alone remaining behind. For in those
things in which a depraved soul, being dispersed about
matter, deserts the proper order of its essence; in all
these, it is accustomed to feed itself with [the pleasing
prospects of ] auspicious hope.

14. Since, therefore, every twofold entrance is a
synibol of nature, this Homeric cavern has, very properly,
not one portal only, but two gates, which differ from
each other conformably to things themselves; of which
one pertains to Gods and good [demons ‘J, but the other
to mortals, and depraved natures. Hence, Plato took
occasion to speak of bowls, and assumes tubs instead of
amphore, and two openings, as we have already observed,
instead of two gates: Pherecydes Syrus also mentions
recesses and trenches, caverns, doors, and gates; and
through these obscurely indicates the generations οὔ.
souls, and their separation from these material realms.
And thus much for an explanation of the Homeric cave,
which we think we have sufficiently unfolded without.
adducing any farther testimonies from ancient philo-
sophers and theologists, which would give a needless
extent to our discourse.

16. One particular, however, remains to be explained,

not revert to itself like a circle. So far, therefore, as the sieve .is circular,
it is an image of the rational soul; but, as it is placed under the right
‘lines formed from the holes, it is assumed for the irrational soul.. Right
lines, therefore, are in the middle of the cavities. Hence, by the sieve, —
Plato signifies the rational in subjection to the irrational soul. . But the _
water is the flux of nature: for, as Heraclitus says, moisture is the death —
of the soul.”

In this extract the intelligent reader will easily perceive that the
occult signification of the éubs is more scientifically unfolded by Olympio-
᾿ς dorus than by Porphyry.

In the original, was rag μεν, Seog τε καὶ τοις ἀγαϑοις προσεμωσας, . Bat. ᾿
after ayaSoc, I have no doubt we- ‘should: insert ϑαιμοσι..

-ON ‘THE.CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 197

and that is the symbol of the olive planted at the top’ of
the cavern; since Homer appears to indicate something
very admirable by giving it such a position. For he does
not merely say that an olive grows in this place, but that it
flourishes on the summit of the cavern.

‘“¢ High at the head a branching olive grows,
Beneath, a gloomy grotto’s cool recess.”

But the growth of the olive in such a situation, is not
fortuitous, as some one may suspect, but contains the
enigma of the cavern. For since the world was not pro-
duced rashly and casually, but is the work of divine wis-
dom and an intellectual nature, hence an olive, the
symbol of this wisdom, flourishes near the present cavern,
which is an image of the world. For the olive is the
‘plant of Minerva; and Minerva is wisdom. But this
Goddess being produced from the head of, Jupiter, the
theologist has discovered an appropriate place for the
olive, by consecrating it at the summit of the port; signi-
fying by this, that the universe is not the effect of
a casual event, and the work of irrational fortune, but
that it is the offspring of an intellectual nature and divine
wisdom, which is separated, indeed, from it [by a differ-
ence of essence], but yet is near to it, through being
established on the summit of the whole port; [i.e. from
the dignity and excellence of its nature governing the
whole with consummate wisdom]. Since, however, an
olive is ever-flourishing, it possesses a certain peculiarity
in the highest degree adapted to the revolutions of souls
in the world; for to such souls this cave [as we have
5814] is sacred. For in summer, the white leaves of the
olive tend upward, but in winter, the whiter leaves are
bent downward. On this account, also, in prayers and
supplications, men extend the branches of an olive, omin-
ating from this, that they shall exchange the sorrowful
darkness of danger for the fair light of security and
peace. The olive, therefore, being naturally ever-flou-
rishing, bears fruit which is the auxiliary of labour [by

108 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

being its reward]; it is also sacred to Minerva; supplies
the victors in athletic labours with crowns; and affords a
friendly branch to the suppliant petitioner. Thus, too,
the world is governed by an intellectual nature, and
is conducted by a wisdom eternal and ever-flourishing 5
by which the rewards of victory are conferred on
the conquerors in’ the athletic race of life, as the
reward of severe toil and patient perseverance. And the
Demiurgus, who connects and contains the world [in
ineffable comprehensions], invigorates miserable and sup-
pliant souls.

16. In this cave, therefore, says Homer, all external
possessions must be deposited. Here, naked, and assum-
ing a suppliant habit, afflicted in body, casting aside
every thing superfluous, and being averse to the energies
of sense, it is requisite to sit at the foot of the olive, and
consult with Minerva by what means we may most effec-
tually destroy that hostile rout of passions which insidi-
ously lurk in the secret recesses of the soul. Indeed, as
it appears to me, it was not without reason that Numenius
and his followers thought the person of Ulysses in the
Odyssey represented to us a man, who passes in a regular
manner over the dark and stormy sea of generation, and
thus at length arrives at that region where tempests and
seas are unknown, and finds a nation

“ Who ne’er knew salt, or heard the billows roar.”

17. Again, according to Plato, the deep, the sea, and
ἃ tempest, are images of a material nature. And on this
account, I think, the poet called the port by the name of
Phorcys. For he says, “ It is the port of the ancient matine
Phorcys®.” The daughter, likewise, of this God is men-

& Phorcys is one among the ennead of Gods who, according to
Plato in the Timzus, fabricate generation. Of this deity, Proclus
observes, “ that as the Jupiter in this ennead causes the unapparent
divisions and separation of forms made by Saturn to beconie apparertt,
and as Rhea calls them forth into motion and generation ; so-Phoicys
inserts them in matter, produces sensible natures, and.adoms the visible

ΟΝ THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS. 199

tioned in the beginning of the Odyssey. But from
Thoosa the Cyclops was born, whom Ulysses deprived of
sight. And this deed of Ulysses became the occasion of
reminding him of his errors, till he was safely landed in
his native country. On this account, too, a seat under
the olive is proper to Ulysses, as to one who implores
divinity, and would appease his natal demon with a sup-
pliant branch. For it will not be simply, and in a
concise way, possible for any one to be liberated from this
sensible life, who blinds this demon, and renders his
energies inefficacious ; but he who dares to do this, will
be pursued by the anger" of the marine and material
Gods, whom it is first requisite to appease by sacrifices,
labours, and patient endurance ; at one time, indeed, con-
tending with the passions, and at another employmg
enchantments and deceptions, and by these, transforming
himself in an all-various manner; in order that, being at
length divested of the torn garments [by which his true
person was concealed], he may recover the ruined empire
of his soul. Nor will he even then be liberated from
labours ; but this will be effected when he has entirely
passed over the raging sea, and, though still living,
becomes so ignorant of marine and material works
{through deep attention to intelligible concerns], as to
mistake an oar for a corn-van.

18. It must not, however, be thought, that interpreta-
tions of this kind are forced, and nothing more than the
conjectures of ingenious men; but when we consider the
great wisdom of antiquity, and how much Homer excelled
in intellectual prudence, and in an accurate knowledge of
every virtue, it must not be denied that he has obscurely

essence, in order that there may not only be divisions of productive
principles [or forms} in natures and in souls, and in intellectual
essences prior to these; but likewise in sensibles. For this is the pecu-
liarity of fabrication.”

« “The anger of the Gods,” says Proclus, “ is not‘an indication of
any passion in them, but demonstrates our inaptitude to participate
of their illuminations.”

200 ON THE CAVE OF THE NYMPHS.

indicated the images of things of a more divine nature in
the fiction of a fable. For it would not have been.
possible to devise the whole of this hypothesis, unless
the figment had been transferred [to an appropriate
meaning | from certain established truths. But reserving
the discussion of this for another treatise, we shall
here finish our explanation of the present Cave of the
Nymphs.

~~

- * - .

- AUXILIARIES-

TO THE

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. "

SECTION I.

1. Every body is in place; but nothing essentially in-
corporeal, or any thing of this kind, has any locality.

2. Things essentially incorporeal, because they are
more excellent than all body and place, are every where,
not with interval, but impartibly.

3. Things essentially incorporeal, are not locally pre-.
sent with bodies, but are present with them when they
please; by verging towards them so far as they. are
naturally adapted so to verge. They are not, however,
present with them locally, but through habitude, proxi-
mity, and alliance.

4. Things essentially incorporeal, are not present with
bodies, by hypostasis and essence; for they are not
mingled with bodies. But they impart a certain power
which is proximate to bodies, through verging towards
them. For tendency constitutes a certain secondary
power proximate to bodies.

5. Soul, indeed, is a certain medium between an im-
partible essence, and an essence which is divisible about
bodies. But intellect is an impartible essence alone. And
qualities and material forms are divisible about bodies.

6. Not every thing* which acts on another, effects

* In the original, Ov τὸ πριοὺν εἰς «λλο, πέλασει και adn Weill, ἃ WOE’ TD,
But it is evident, from the sense of the whole passage, that, for Ov te.
soe, we should read, Ov way τὸ ποιοῦν, x. 7. A,

202 AUXILIARIES το THE

that which it does effect by approximation and contact ;
but those natures which effect any thing by approxi-
mation and contact, use approximation accidentally.

7. The soul is bound to the body by a conversion
to the corporeal passions; and is again liberated by
becoming impassive to the body.

8. That which nature binds, nature also dissolves :
and that which the soul binds, the soul likewise dis-
solves. Nature, indeed, bound the body to the soul;
but the soul binds herself to the body. Nature, there-
fore, liberates the body from the soul; but the soul
liberates herself from the body.

9. Hence there is a twofold death; the one, indeed,
universally known, in which the body is liberated from
the soul; but the other peculiar to philosophers, in —
which the soul is liberated from the body. Nor does the
one” entirely follow the other.

10. We do not understand similarly in all things, but
in a manner adapted to the essence of each. For intel-
lectual objects we understand intellectually; but those
that pertain to soul rationally. We apprehend plants
spermatically; but bodies idolically [¢. e. as images];
and that which is above all these, super-intellectually and
super-essentially°.

» The article o is wanting here in the original before Ἕτερος.

© Knowledge subsists conformably to the nature by which it is pos-
sessed, and not conformably to the thing known. Hence it is either
better than, or co-ordinate with, or inferior to the object of knowledge.
Thus the rational soul has a knowledge of sensibles, which is superior to
sensibles; but it knows itself with a co-ordinate knowledge; and its
knowledge of divinity is inferior to the object of knowledge. Porphyry,
therefore, is not correct in what he here says. This dogma respecting
the conformity of knowledge to that which knows, rather than to the
thing known, originated from the divine Iamblichus, as we are informed
by Ammonius in his commentary on Aristotle’s treatise De Interpre-
tatione, and is adopted by Proclus (in Parmenid.). Boetius likewise
employs it in his reasoning in lib. v. gboyt the prescience of divinity.
None of his commentators, however, have noticed the source sad
whence it was derived.

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 203

11. Incorporeal hypostases, in descending, are dis-
tributed into parts, and multiplied about individuals with
a diminution of power; but when they ascend by their
energies beyond bodies, they become united, and proceed
into a simultaneous subsistence, through exuberance of
power. ᾿

12. The homonymous is not in bodies only, but life
also is among the number of things which have a multi-
farious subsistence. For the life of a plant is different
from that of an animated being; the life of an intel-
lectual essence differs from that of the nature which is
beyond intellect; and the psychical differs from the intel-

lectual life. For. these natures live, though nothing |

which proceeds from, possesses a life similar to them.

13. Every thing which generates by its very essence,
generates that which is inferior to itself*; and every thing
generated, is naturally converted to its generator. Of
generating natures, however, some are not at all con-
verted to the beings which they generate; but others are
partly converted to them, and partly not; and others are
only converted to their progeny, but are not converted to
themselves. |

14, Every thing generated, possesses from that which
is different from itself the cause of its generation, since
nothing is produced without a cause. Such generated
natures, however, as have their existence through compo-
sition, these are on this account corraptible. But such
as, being simple and incomposite, possess their existence
in a simplicity of hypostasis, these being indissoluble,
are, indeed, incorruptible; yet they are said to be gene-
rated, not as if they were composites, but as being
suspended from a certain cause. Bodies, therefore, are in
a twofold respect generated; as being suspended from a
certain producing cause; and as being composites. But
soul and intellect are only generated as being suspended

ὁ Becanse here the generator is that primarily which the thing geno-

rated is secondarily. See my translation of Proclus’s Theological
Elements, —

204 .. . . AUXILIARIES.TO THE ...:. ..

from a cause, and not as composites. Hence bodies are-
generated, dissoluble and corruptible ; but soul and intel-
lect are unbegotten, as being without composition, and
on this. account indissoluble and incorruptible; yet they
are generated so far as they are suspended from a cause.::
15. Intellect is not the principle of all things; for
intellect is many things; but, prior to the many, it is
necessary that there should be the one. It is evident,
however, that intellect is many things. For it always
understands its conceptions, which are not one, but many ;
and which are not any thing else than itself. If, there-
fore, it is the same with its conceptions, but they are
many, intellect also will be many things. But that it
is the same with intelligibles [or the objects of its intel-
lection], may be thus demonstrated. For, if there is any
thing which intellect surveys, it will either survey thie
thing as contained in itself, or as placed in something
else. And that intellect, indeed, contemplates or sur-
veys, is evident. For, in conjunction with intellection,
or intellectual perception, it will be intellect; but 1f you
deprive it of intellection, you will destroy its essence. Fe
is necessary, therefore, that, directing our attention to the
properties: of knowledge, we should investigate the per-
ception of intellect. All the gnostic powers, then, which
we: contain, are universally sense, imagination, and intel.
lect®. The-power, however, which employs sense, surveys
by projecting itself to externals, not being united to the
objects which it surveys, but only receiving an- impres-
sion of, by exerting its energies upon them. When

. Porphyry here summarily comprehends the rational gnostic powers
of the soul in intellect, because, being rational, they are expansions of
intellect properly so called. But these powers, beginning from the lowest,
are opinion, dianoia, and the summit of dianoia, which summit is ‘the
intellect of the human‘soul, and is that power, by the-light of which we*
perceive the truth of axioms, it being intuitive perception. Dsanoia ig:
the discursive energy of reason ; or it is that power which reasons scien—
tifically, deriving the principles of its reasoning from intelléct. And
opinion is that power. which knows that a thing is, but is ignorant 6 of the
cause of it, or why it is. . -

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE:NATURES. 208:

therefore, the. eye -sees a:visible object, it is impossible’
that τὸ should become the same with that which it per-*’
ceives: for it would. not see if there was not an interval:
between .it.and the object of its perception. And, after:
the.same manner, that which is touched, if it.was the
same with that. by which it is touched,. would. perish.
From which.it is. evident that. sense, and that which
employs sense, must always tend to:an external object,
in ‘order. to. apprehend something. sensible. In like-
manner . also, the phantasy, or imagination, always
tends ‘to something external, and by this extension
of itself, gives subsistence. to, or prepates an image ; its
extension to :what is external, indicating that the object
of its perception.is a resemblance of something external.
And. such, indeed, is. the: apprehension of these two
powers ; neither of. which verging to, and being collected ᾿
into itself, perceives either a sensible or insensible form. ~
~ In intellect, however, the apprehension of-its objects
does not subsist after this manner, but is effected by
converging to, and surveying itself. ‘For ;by departing -
from itself,.in order. to survey its own: energies, and
become the eye of them, and the sight of essences, it .will
not-.understand anything. Hence, (88 sense is to that
which is sensible, so is intellect to that which is intel- -
ligible. Sense, however, by extending itself to externals, -
finds that which is sensible situated in matter; but intel-"
lect surveys the intelligible, by being collected into itself, .
and not extended outwardly‘. On this account some are
of opinion, that the hypostasis of intellect differs from,
that of the phantasy only in name. For the phantasy, in
the’ rational animal, appeared to, them to be intelligence.
As these men, however, suspended all things from matter
and .a corporeal -nature, it. follows that they should also |
suspend ‘from these intellect. - But-our -intelléct surveys '

f In the original, εἰ δὲ pan she, ἐκτεινομενος ; but for δι δὲ μη, If appears ¢ to
me to be obviously necessary to read οὐδὲ μή. |

206 AUX(LIARIES TO THE

both bodies and other essences. Hence it apprehends
them situated somewhere. But as the proper objects of
intellect have a subsistence out of matter, they will be
no where® [locallyj. it is evident, therefore, that intel-
lectual natures are to be conjoined with intelligence. But
1 intellectual natures are in intellect, it follows that intel-
lect, when it understands intelligibles, surveys both the
intelligible and itself; and that proceeding into itself, it
perceives intellectually, because it proceeds into inted-
ligibles. Jf, however, intellect understands. many things,
and not.one thing only, intellect also will necessarily
be many. But-the one subsists prior to the many; so that
it is necessary ‘that the one should be prior to intellect. |

16. Memory is not the conservation of imaginations,
but the power of.calling forth de novo those concep-
tions which had previously oocupied the attention of the
mind®,

17. Soul, mdeed, contains the reasons [or forms] of
all things, ‘but energizes according to them, either bamg
called forth to this energy by ‘something else, or con-
verting ‘itself to them inwardly. And when called forth
by something else, ‘it introduces, .as it were, the senses to
externals, but when it enters into itself, it becomes occu~
pied with intellectual conceptions. Hence some one may
say, that neither the senses, nor-intellectual perceptions,
are without the phantasy; so that, as in the animal, the
genses are ‘not without the passive affection of the sen-

8 In the. original, ἐξω δὲ ovrey vaug, οὐδαμοῦ ay sux ταῦτα s which Holste-
nius, wholly mistaking the meaning, most erroneously translates, “ At ¢i
extra materiam sint, neutiquam id fierl poterit.” Farther on, Porphyry
asserts, that God, intellect, and soul, are.no where, according to cor~
poreal: locality.
bh In the original, = -pavopee: ue ἔστι darraciny cures, ade Ten μέλγαι-

DSevrev προδαλλεσθαι ἐκ mac προβληματα. But for σπροβληματα, 1 read φρολυρρ-
ματα. This power, by which Porphyry characterizes memory, is of a
stable nature. And hence memory is stability of knowledge, i in the
same manner as immortality is stability of life, and eternity stability of
being.

ῬΕΒΟΣΡΤΙΟΝ OF INTELINGIBLE NATURES, 407

sitive ‘organs, in hike manner intellections are net without
‘the phantasy. Perhaps, however, 1t may be said, in
answer to this, ithat, as an impression in the sensitive
organ is the concomitant of the sensitive animal, θ0 888»
logously a phantasm 1 is the concemitant of the: intelleotion
of the soul in man, considered as an anmal’,

18. Soul is an‘essence without magmitude, imniatertal,
incorruptible, possessing its existence in life, and having
life from ‘itself.

19. The passivity of bodies is different from that of
incorporeal natures. For the passivity of ‘bodies is
attended with mutation; but the adaptations and passions
of the soul are energies ; yet they are by-no meens similar
to the calefactions and frigefactions:of-bodies. Hence, if
the passivity of bodies is accompanied by mutation, it
must be said that all incorporeal natures are impassive.
For ‘the essences which are septrated from matter. and
bodies, are whut ‘they are in energy. ‘But those things
which approximate ‘to matter ‘and ‘bodies, are themselves,
indeed, impassive’; but the natares ‘in which they-are sur
veyed are passive. -For when the ‘animal perceives sen-
sibly, the soul fi.¢. the rational soul] appears to'be-similag
to separate'harniony*,of itself moving the shords adapted

1 See the ‘notes ‘on the Sd book ‘of my ‘translation of Aristotle's
treatise on'the ‘Soul, and also my ‘translation of Plétinus on’ Félicity.
“ The phantasy,” says Olynpiodorus (in Platonis Phd.) “is an impedi-
ment to our intellectual conceptions; and hence, when we are agitated
by the inspiring influence of Divinity, if the phantasy intervenes, the
enthusiastic energy ceases: for enthusiasm and the phantasy are con-
trary to each other. Should it be asked, whether the soul is able to
energize without the phantasy? we reply, that its perception of universals
proves that it is able. It has perceptions, therefore, independent ef the
phantasy; at: the same time, however, the phantasy attends ittin its
energies, just as a storm pursues him who sails on the sea.”

k The analogy of the soul to harmony, is more accurately uafolded
‘as follows, by Olympiodorus, in his Commentary on the Phado of. Plate,
‘than it 15 in this place ‘by Porphyry : “ Harmony has a triple subsistence,
‘For it is dither harmony iteelf, or it-is that which is first harmonized, and
which is such according to the whole:.of itself; or it -is- that αἰδοῖ

208 ᾿ AUXILTARIES TO THE

to harmony ; ; but the body is similar to the inseparable
harmony in the chords, [{. 6. to the harmony which cannot
exist separate from the chords]. But the animal is the
cause of the motion, because it is an animated being. It
1s, however, analogous to a musician, because it is har-
monic ; but the bodies which are struck through sensitive
passion, are analogous to the harmonized chords ef a
musical instrument. For in this instance, also, separate
harmony is not passively affected, but the chords. And
the musician, indeed, moves according to the harmony
which is in him; yet the chords would not be musically’
mioved, even though the musician wished that they should,
unless harmony ordered this to take place.

20. Incorporeal natures are not denominated like
bodies, according to a participation in common of one
and the same genus; but they derive their appellation
from.a mere privation with respect to bodies. Hence, °
nothing hinders some of them from having a subsistence
as beings, but others as non-beings; some of them, from
being prior to, and others posterior to bodies ; some, from
- being separate, and others inseparable from bodies; some,
from ‘having a subsistence by themselves, but others from.
being indigent of things different from themselves, to
their existence; some, from being the same through
energies and self-motive lives, but others from subsisting
together with lives, and energies of a certain quality.
For they subsist according to a negation of the things
which they are not, and not according to the affirmation
of the things which they are.

21. The properties of matter, according to the an-

is is setondarily harmonized, and which partially participates of harmony.
The'first of these must be assigned to intellect, the second to soul, and ᾿
the third to body. This last, too, is corruptible, because it subsists in a
‘subject ; but the other two are incorruptible, because they are neither _
‘Composites, nor dependent on 8᾽ subject. Hence, the rational soul
is analogous to a musician, but the animated‘ body to harmonized |
chords ; for the former has a subsistence separate, but the latter ἃ inse-
paritile from tlie musical instrument. ”

\

PERCEPIION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 209°

cients, are the following : It is incorporeal ; for it is dif-
ferent from bodies. It is without life; for it is neither
intellect nor soul, nor vital from itself [7.e. essentially]. It
is also formless, variable, infinite, and powerless. Hence,
it is neither being, nor yet non-being. Not that it is non-
being like motion, but it is true non-being, the image
and phantasm of bulk, because it is that which bulk
primarily contains. It is likewise powerless, and the
desire of subsistence, has stability, but not in permanency,
and always appears in itself to be contrary. Hence, it is
both small and great, more and less, deficient and exceed-
ing. It is always becoming to be, or rising into exist
ence ; abides not, and yet is unable to fly away; and
is the defect of all being. Hence, in whatever it an-
nounces itself to be, it deceives ; and though it should
appear to be great, it is nevertheless small. For it
resembles a‘ flying mockery, eluding all pursuit, and
vanishing into non-entity. For its flight is not in place,
but is effected. by its desertion of real being. Hence,
also, the images which are in it, are in an image more unreal
than themselves; just as in a mirror, where the thing
represented is in one place, and the representation of
it in another. It likewise appears to be full, yet contains
nothing, though it seems to possess all things!.

22. All passions subsist about the same thing as that
about which corruption subsists; for the reception of
passion is the path to corruption. And the thing that is
the subject of passivity, is also the subject of corruption.
Nothing incorporeal, however, is corrupted. But some
of them either exist, or do not exist; so that they are not
at all passive. For that which is passive, ought not to be
a thing of this kind, but such as may be changed in
quality, and corrupted by the properties of the things

' What Porphyry here says about matter, is derived from the treatise
of Plotinus, On the Impassivity of Incorporeal Natures, to my translation
of which I refer the reader.

P

-"-

210 AUXILIARIES TO THE

that enter into it, and cause it to be passive. For the
change in quality of that which is inherent, is not
casually effected. Neither, therefore, does matter suffer ;
for it is. of itself without quality. Nor do the forms
which enter into, and depart from it, suffer; but the
passion subsists about the composite from matter and
form, the very being of which consiéts in the union of the
two. For this, in the contrary powers and qualities of
the things which enter and produce passion, is seen to
be the subject of them. On which account, also, those
things, the life of which is externally derived, and does
not subsist from themselves, are capable of suffering both
the participation and the privation of life. But those
beings whose existence consists in an impassive life,
must necessarily possess a permanent life ; just as a pri-
vation of life, so far as it is a privation of it, is attended |
with impassivity. As, therefore, to be changed and to
suffer pertain to the composite from matter and form, and
this 1s body, but matter is exempt from this ; thus also, to
live and to die, and to suffer through the participation of
life and death, is beheld in the composite from soul and
body. Nevertheless, this does not happen to the soul;
because it is not a thing which consists of life and
the privation of life, but consists of life alone. And it
possesses this, because its essence is simple, and the
reason [or form] of the soul is self-motive™.

23. An intellectual essence is so similar in its parts,
that the same” things exist both in a partial and an
all-perfect intellect. In an universal intellect, however,
partial natures subsist universally; but in a partial
intellect, both universals and particulars subsist partially.

24. Of that essence, the existence of which is in life,
and the passions of which are lives, the death also con-
sists in a certain life, and not in a total privation of life ;

™ See my translation of the before-mentioned treatise of Plotinus.
Ὁ For +a ora here, I read τὰ aura,

-

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 2}}

because, neither is the deprivation of life in this essence
a passion, or a path which entirely leads to a non-vital
subsistence,

25. In incorporeal lives, the progressions are effected
while the lives themselves remain firm and stable, nothing’
pertaining to them being corrupted, or changed into the
hypostasis of things subordinate to them. Hence, neither
are the things to which they give subsistence produced
with a certain coysruption or mutation. Nor do these
incorporeal lives subsist like generation, which parti
cipates of corruption and mutation. Hence, they are
unbegotten and incorruptible, and on this account are
unfolded into light without generation and incorruptibly.

26. Of that nature which is beyond intellect, many
things are asserted through intellection, but it is surveyed
by a cessation of intellectual energy better than with it°;
just as with respect to one who is asleep, many things
are asserted of him while he is in that state hy those who
are awake; but the proper knowledge and apprehension
of his dormant condition, is only to be obtained through
sleep. For the similar is known by the similar; because
all knowledge is an assimilation to the object of knowledge.

27. With respect to that which is non-being, we
either produce it, being ourselves separated from real
being, or we have a preconception of it, as adhering to
being. Hence, if we are separated from being, we have
not an antecedent conception of the non-being. which is
above being, but our knowledge in this case is only that
of a false passion, such as that which happens to a man ᾿
when he departs from himself. For as a man may him-
self, and through himself, be truly elevated to the non-
being which is above being, so, by departing from being,

° Hence, it is beautifully said in the Clavis of Hermes Trismegistus,
“ that the knowledge of the good [or the supreme principle of things], is
a divine silence, and the quiescence of all the senses.” See, also, on this
subject, a most admirable extract from Damascius, περι ἀρχῶν; at the end
of the Sd volume of my Plato.

212 AUXILIARIES TO THE

he is led to the non-being which is a falling off from
being. |

28. The hypostasis of body is no impediment what-
ever to that which is essentially incorporeal, so as to
prevent it from being where, and in such a way, as it
wishes to be. For as that which is without bulk 18
incomprehensible by body, and does not at all pertain to
it, so that which has bulk cannot impede or obscure
an ‘incorporeal nature, but lies before it like a non-entity.
Nor does that which is incorporeal pervade locally, when
it wishes to pass from one thing to another; for place is
consubsistent with bulk. Nor is it compressed by bodies.
For that which in any way whatever is connected with
bulk, may be compressed, and effect a transition locally ;
but that which is entirely without bulk and without mag-
nitude, cannot be restrained by that which has bulk, and
does not participate of local motion. Hence, by a cer-
tain disposition, it is found to be there, where it is
inclined to be, being with respect to place every where
and yet no where’. By a certain disposition, therefore, it
is either above the heavens, or is contained in a certain
part of the world. When, however, it is contained
in a certain part of the world, it is not visible to the
eyes, but the presence of it becomes manifest from its
works.

29. It is necessary that an incorporeal nature, if it is
contained in body, should not be enclosed in it like a
wild beast in a den; (for no body is able thus to enclose
and comprehend it), nor is it contained in body in the
same way as a bladder contains something liquid, or
wind ; but it is requisite that it should give subsistence to
certain powers which verge to what is external, through
its union with body; by which powers, when it descends,
t becomes complicated with body. Its conjunction,
therefore, with body, is effected through an ineffable

P For that which is truly incorporeal, is every where virtually, t.e. in
power and efficacy, but 1s no where locally.

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 213

extension. Hence, nothing else binds it, but itself binds
itself to body. Neither, therefore, is it liberated from the
body, when the body is [mortally] wounded and cor-
rupted, but it liberates itself, by turning itself from an
adhering affection to the body. |

30. None of the hypostases which rank as wholes, and
are perfect, is converted to its own progeny ; but all per-
fect hypostases are elevated to their generators as far
as to the mundane body [or the body of the world]. For
this body, being perfect, is elevated to its soul, which
is intellectual: and on this account it is moved in ἃ
circle. But the soul of this body is elevated to intellect ;
and intellect, to the first principle of all things. All
beings, therefore, proceed to this principle as much as
possible, bewinning from the last of things. The eleva-
tion, however, to that which is first, is either proximate or
remote. Hence, these natures may not only be said to
aspire after the highest God, but also to enjoy him to the
utmost of their power. But in partial? hypostases, and
which are able to verge to many things, there is also
a desire of being converted to their progeny. Hence,
likewise, in these there is error, in these there is repre-
hensible incredulity. These, therefore, matter injures,
because they are capable of being converted to it, being
at the same time able to be converted to divinity. Hence,
perfection gives subsistence to secondary from primary
natures, preserving them converted to the first of things ;
but imperfection converts primary’ to posterior natures,
and causes them to love the beings which have departed
from divinity prior to themselves.

31. God is every where because he is.no where: and
this is also true of intellect and soul : for each of these is

4 For μερισταις here, I read, μερικαις. For Porphyry is here speaking
of essences which are opposed to such as rank as wholes, as is evident
from the whole of this paragraph.

* The primary natures of which Porphyry is now speaking, are
rational partial souls, such as ours; for the natures superior to these, are
never converted to beings posterior to themselves.

214 AUXILIARIES TO THE

every where, because each is no where. But God indeed
is every where, and no where, with respect to all things
which are posterior to him; and he’ alone is such as he
is, and such as he wills himself to be. Intellect is in God,
but is every where, and no where, with respect to the
natures posterior to it. And soul is in God and intellect,
and is every where and no where, in [or with respect to}
body*. But body is in soul, and in intellect", and in
God. And as all beings and non-beings are from and in
God, hence, he is neither beings nor non-beings, nor
stibsists in them. For if, indeed, he was alone every
where, he would be all things and in all, but since he is
also no where, all things are produced through him, and
are contamed in him, because he is every where. They
are, however, different from him, because he is no where.
Thus, likewise, intellect beirig every where and no where,
is the cause of souls, and of the natures posterior to
souls ; yet intellect is not soul, nor the natures posterior
to soul, nor subsists in them; because it is not only
every where, but is also no where, with respect to the
natures posterior to it. And soul is neither body, nor in
body, bit is the cause of body; because being every
where, it is also no where, with respect to body. And
this progression of things in the tiniverse extends as far
as to that which is neither able to be at once every where,
nor at once no where, but partially participates of each of
these*.

32. The soul does not exist on the earth [when it is
conversant with terrene naturés,] in the same manner

» For αὐτου, ssthic, I read, αυτος.

* Tn the original, καὶ ψυχο εν νῳ τῇ καὶ Sey πανταχον, και ουὐδαμισὺ §Y σορῥερτε,
but it appears to me to be necessary to read, καὶ ψυχη ev vw τε καὶ Sem, καὶ
Wavrayou nas ουδαμου ἐν σωματι.

@ xa: ἐν νῷ, is omitted in the original, but ought to be insérted, as
is evident from the version of Holstenius.

x The irrational life is a thing of this kind, which is partly separable
and partly inseparable from body.” Hence, so far as it is inseparable
from body, it partakes of the every where ; but, so far as it is séparable,.
of the no where.

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 215

as bodies accede to the earth; but a subsistence of the
soul on the earth, signifies its presiding over terrene
bodies. Thus, also, the soul is said to be in Hades, when
it presides over its image’, which is naturally adapted to
be in place, but possesses its hypostasis in darkness.
So that if Hades is a subterranean dark place, the soul,
though fiot divulsed from being, will exist in Hades, by
attracting to itself its image. For when the soul departs
from the solid body, the spirit accompanies it which it
had collected from the starry spheres. But as from its
adhering affection to the body, it exerts a partial reason,
through which it possesses an habitude to a body of a
eértain quality, in performing the energies of life ;—
hence, from this adhesion to body, the form of the phan-
tasy is impressed in the spirit, and thus the image is
attracted by the soul. The soul, however, is said to be
in Hades, because the spirit obtains a formless and
obscure nature. And as a heavy and moist spirit per-
vades as far as to subterranean places, hence the soul is
said to proceed under the earth. Not that this essence of
the soul changes one place for another, and subsists in
place, but it receives the habitudes of bodies which are
naturally adapted to change their places, and to be
allotted a subsistence in place ; such-like bodies receiving
it according to aptitudes, from being disposed after a
certain manner towards it. For the soul, conformably to
the manner in which it is disposed, finds an appropriate
body. Hence, when it is disposed in a purer manner,
it has a connascent body which approximates to an
ethereal nature, and this is an ethereal body. But when it
proceeds from reason to the energies of the phantasy;
then its connascent body is of a solar-form nature. And
when it becomes effeminate and vehemently excited by
corporeal form, then it is connected with a lunar-form

y 3. 6. The animal spirit, or pneumatic soul, in which the rational
soul suffers her punishments in Hades.

~

216 AUXILIARIES TO THE

body. When, however, it falls into bodies which consist
of humid vapours, then a perfect ignorance of real being
follows, together with darkness and infancy.

Moreover, in its egress from the body, if it still
possesses a spirit turbid from humid exhalations, it then
attracts to itself a shadow, and becomes heavy; a spirit
of this kind naturally striving to penetrate santo the
recesses of the earth, unless a certain other cause draws
it in a contrary direction. As therefore the soul, when
surrounded with this testaceous and terrene vestment,
necessarily lives on the earth; so likewise when it
attracts a moist spirit, it is necessarily surrounded with
the image. But it attracts moisture when it continually
endeavours to associate with nature, whose operations
are effected in moisture, and which are rather under than
upon the earth. When, however, the soul earnestly
endeavours to depart from nature, then she becomes a
dry splendour, without a shadow, and without a cloud, or
mist. For moisture gives subsistence to a mist in the
air; but dryness constitutes a dry splendour from exha-
lation.

33. The things which are truly predicated of a sensible
and material nature, are these: that it has, in every
respect, a diffused and dispersed subsistence ; that it
is mutable; that it has its existence in difference ; that
it is a composite ; that it subsists by itself, [as the subject
or recipient of other things ;] that it is beheld in place,
and in bulk: and other properties similar to these are
asserted of it. But the following particulars are pre-
dicated of truly existing being, and which itself subsists
from itself; viz. that it is always established in itself;
that it has an existence perpetually similar and the same;
that it 3s essentialized in sameness; that it is immutable
according to essence, is uncompounded, is neither disso-.
luble, nor, in place, nor is dispersed into bulk; and ig
neither generated, nor capable of being destroyed: and
other properties are asserted of it similar to these. To

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 217

which predications adhering, we should neither ourselves
assert any thing repugnant to them, concerning the
different nature of sensible and truly-existing beings,
nor assent to those who do.

SECTION II.

34. There is one kind of virtues pertaining to the
political character, and another to the man who tends to
contemplation, and who, on this account, is called theo-
retic, and is now a beholder [of intellectual and in-
telligible natures]. And there are also other virtnes per-
taining to intellect, so far as it is intellect, and separate |
from soul. The virtues indeed of the political character,
and which consist in the moderation of the passions, are
characterized by following and being obedient to the
reasoning about that which is becoming in actions.
Hence, looking to an innoxious converse with neighbours,
these virtues are denominated, from the aggregation of
fellowship, political. And here prudence indeed subsists
about the reasoning part; fortitude about the irascible
part; temperance in the consent and symphony of the
epithymetic? with the reasoning part; and justice, in each
of these performing its proper employment with respect to
governing and being governed. But the virtues of him
who proceeds to the contemplative life, consist in a
departure from terrestrial concerns. Hence, also, they
are called purifications, being surveyed in the refraining
from corporeal actions, and avoiding sympathies with the
body. For these are the virtues of the soul elevating
itself to true being. The political virtues therefore °
adorn the mortal man, and are the forerunners of purifi-
cations. For it is necessary that he who is adorned by
the cathartic virtues, should abstain from doing any thing
precedaneously in conjunction with body. Hence, in

* 3. ὁ. That part of the soul which is the source of all-various desires.,

218 AUXILIARIES TO THE

these purifications, not to opine with body, but to ener-—

gize alone, gives subsistence to prudence; which derives
its perfection through energizing intellectually with
purity. But not to be similarly passive with the body,
constitutes temperance. Not to fear a departure from
body, as into something void, and non-entity, gives sub-
sistence to fortitude. But when reason and intellect are
the leaders, and there is no resistance [from the irrational
part], justice 1s produced. The disposition therefore,
according to the political virtues, is surveyed in the
moderation of the passions ; having for its end to live as
man conformable to nature. But the disposition, accord-
ing to the theoretic virtues, is beheld in apathy*, the end
of which is a similitude to God.

Since, however, of purification, one kind consists in
purifying, but another pertains to those that.are purified,
the cathartic virtues are surveyed according to both these
significations of purification. For the end of purification
is to become pure. But since purification, and the being
purified, are an ablation of every thing foreign, the goad
resulting from them will be different from that which
purifies; so, that if that which is purified was good
prior to the impurity with which it is defiled, purification
is sufficient. That, however, which remains after purifi-
cation, is good, and not purification. The nature of the
soul also was not good [prior to purification], but is
that which is able to partake of good, and 15 bomform.
For if this were not the case, it would not have become
situated in evil. The good therefore of the soul consists
in being united to its generator, but its evil in an associ-
ation with things subordinate to itself. Its evil also is
twofold ; the one arising from an association with terres-
trial natures, but the other from doing this with an
excess of the passions. Hence, all the political virtues
which liberate the soul from one evil, may be denomi-

@ This philosophic apathy is not, as is stupidly suppesed by most of
the present day, insensibility, but a perfect subjugation of the passions
to reason.

ΟΠ PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 219

nated virtues, and are honourable. But the cathartic are
more honourable, and liberate it from evil, so far as it is
soul. It is necessary therefore, that the soul, when
purified, should associate with its generator. Hence, the
virtue of it, after its conversion, consists in a scientific
_ knowledge of [true] being ; but this will not be the case,
unless conversion precedes.

There is, therefore, another genus of virtues . after the
cathartic and political, and which are the virtues of the
soul energizing intellectually. And here, indeed, wisdom
and prudence consist in the contemplation of those things
which intellect possesses. But justice consists in per-
forming what is appropriate in conformity to, and ener-
gizing according to intellect. Zemperance is an inward
conversion of the soul to intellect. And fortitude is
apathy, according to a similitude of that to which the soul
looks, and which is naturally impassive. These virtues
also, in the same manner as the others, alternately follow
each other. .

The fourth species of the virtues, is that of the para-
digms subsisting in intellect: which are more excellent
than the psychical virtues, and exist as the paradigms of
these’; the virtues of the soul being the similitudes of
them. And intellect indeed is that in which all things
subsist at once as paradigms. Here, therefore, prudence
is science ; but intellect that knows [all things] 18 wisdom.
Temperance is that which is converted to itself. The
proper work of intellect, is the performance of its appro-
priate duty, [and this is justice®.| But fortitude is same-
ness, and the abiding with purity in itself, through an
abundance of power. There are therefore four genera of
virtues; of which, indeed, some pertain to intellect,
concur with the essence of it, and are paradigmatic.
Others pertain to soul now looking to intellect, and

> The words xa: δικαιοσύνη, are omitted in the original. But it is
evident from the treatise of Plotinus “ On the Virtues,” that they ought
to be inserted. For what Porphyry says in this Section about the
virtues, 1s derived from that treatise.

220 AUXILIARIES TO THE

being filled from it. Others belong to the soul of man,
purifying itself, and becoming purified from the body, and
the irrational passions. And others are the virtues of the
soul of man, adorning the man, through giving measure
and bound to the irrational nature, and producing mode-
ration in the passions. And he indeed, who has the greater
virtues, has also necessarily the less; but the contrury ts not
true, that he who has the less, has also the greater virtues.
Nor will he who possesses the greater, energize prece-
daneously according to the less, but only so far as the
necessities of the mortal nature require. The scope also
of the virtues, is, as we have said, generically different in
the different virtues. For the scope of the political virtues,
is to give measure to the passions in their practical
energies according to nature. But the scope of the.
cathartic virtues, 1s entirely to obliterate the remembrance
of the passions; and the scope of the rest subsists
analogously to what has been before said. Hence, he
who energizes according to the practical virtues, is a
worthy man; but he who energizes ‘according to the
catharti virtues, is an angelic man, or is also a@ good
demon. He who energizes according to the intellectual
virtues alone is ua God; but he who energizes according
to the paradigmatic virtues, is the father of the Gods. We,
therefore, ought especially to pay attention to the cathartic
virtues, since we may obtain these in the present life.
But through these, the ascent is to the more honourable
virtues. Hence, it 1s requisite to survey to what degree
purification may be extended: for it is a separation from
body, and from the passive motion of the irrational part.
But how this may be effected, and to what extent, must
now be unfolded. .

In the first place, indeed, .it 1s necessary that he who
intends to acquire this purification, should, as the found-
ation and basis of it, know himself to be a soul bound in
a foreign thing, and in a different essence. In the second
place, as that which is raised from this foundation, he
should collect himself from the body, and as it were from

ΟΡΕΒΟΕΡΤΙΟΝ OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES, 22]

different places, so as to be disposed in a manner perfectly
impassive with respect to the body. For he who ener-
gizes uninterruptedly according to sense, though he may
not do this with an adhering affection, and the enjoy-
ment resulting from pleasure, yet, at the same time, his
attention is dissipated about the body, in consequence of
becoming through sense‘ in contact with it. But we are
addicted to the pleasures or pains of sensibles ; in con-
junction with a promptitude, and converging sympathy ;
from which disposition it is requisite to be purified. This,
however, will be effected by admitting necessary pleasures, and
the sensutions of them, merely as remedies, or as a liberation
from pain’, in order that (the rational part] may not be
wnpeded [in tts energies]. Pain also must be taken away.
But if this is not possible, it must be mildly diminished.
And it will be diminished, if the soul is not copassive

with it. Anger, likewise, must as much as possible -

be taken away; and must by no means be premedi-
tated. But if it cannot be entirely removed, deliberate
choice must not be mingled with it, but the unpre-

meditated motion must be the impulse of the irrational .

part. That however which is unpremeditated, is wnbecile
and small. All fear likewise must be expelled. For
he who is addpted to this purification, will fear nothing.
Here, however, if it should take place, it will be un-
premeditated. Anger therefore and fear must be used
for the purpose of admonition. But the desire of
every thing base must be exterminated. Such a one also,
so far as he is a cathartic philosopher, will not desire
meats and drinks [except so far as they are necessary].
Neither must there be the unpremeditated in natural
venereal connexions ; but if this should take place, it must
only be as far as to that precipitate wnagination which

© Instead of κατ᾽ αὐτὴν, here it is necessary to read, κατ᾽ αἰσϑησιν.

4 Conformably to this, as we have before observed, Aristotle says in
the 7th Book of his Nicomachean Ethics, ‘6 that corporeal pleasures are
remedies against pain, and that they fill up the indigence of nature, but

perfect no energy of the rational soul.”

"

ἊΨ» «δ.

292 AUXILIARIES TO THE

energizes in sleep. In short, the intellectual soul itself of
the purified man must be liberated from all these [cor-
_poreal propensities]. He must likewise endeavour, that
what is moved to the irrational nature of corporeal
passions, may be moved without sympathy, and without
animadversion ; so that the motions themselves may be
immediately dissolved, through their vicinity to the
reasoning power. This, however, will not take place
while the purification is proceeding to its perfection ; but
will happen to those in whom reason rules without oppo-
sition. Hence, in these, the inferior part will so venerate
reason, that it wilt be indignant if it is at all moved,
in consequence of not being quiet when its master is
present, and will reprove itself for its imbecility. These,
however, are yet only moderations of the passions, but
at length terminate in apathy. For when copassivity
is entirely exterminated, then apathy is present with him
who is purified from this passivity. For passion becomes
moved when reason imparts excitation, through verging
[to the irrational nature]. |
35. Every thing which is situated somewhere, is there
situated according to its own nature, and not preter-
naturally. For body, therefore, which subsists in matter
and bulk, to be somewhere, is to be in place. Hence, for
the body of the world, which is material and has bulk, to
be every where, is to be extended with interval, and
to subsist in the place of interval, But a subsistence ip
place, is not at all present with the intelligible world, nar,
in short, with that which is immaterial, and essentially
incorporeal, because it is without bulk, and without inter-
val; so that the ubiquity of an incorporeal nature is not
local. Hence, neither will one part of uw be here, but
another there; for if this were the case, it would not be
out of place, nor without interval ; but wherever it is, the
whole of it is there. Nor is it indeed in this, but not
. in another place; for thus it would be comprehended by
one place, but separated from another. Nor is it remote
from this thing, but near to that ; im the same manner as

~

ΠΟ PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 223

remoteness and nearness are asserted of things which are
adapted to be in place, according to the measures of
intervals. Hence, the sensible is present, indeed, with
the intelligible world, according to interval, but [a truly]
incorporeal nature is present with the world impartibly,
and unaccompanied by interval. The impartible, like-
wise, when it is in that which has interval, is wholly
in every part of it, being one and the same in number [in
every part of it]. That which is impartible, therefore,
and without multitude, becomes extended into magnitude,
and multiplied, when intimately connected with that
which is naturally multitudinous, and endued with magni-
tude; and thus the latter receives the former in such
a way as it is adapted to receive it, and not such as
the former truly is. But that which is partible and
multitudinous, is received by that which is naturally
impartible and without multitude, impartibly and non-
multitudinously, and after this manner is present with it ;
i.e. the impartible is present impartibly, without plurality,
and without a subsistence in place, conformably to its
own nature, with that which is partible, and which is
naturally multitudinous, and exists in place. But that
which is partible, multiplied, and in place, is present with
the impartible essence, partibly, multitudinously, and
locally. Hence, it is necessary, in the survey of these
natures, to preserve and not confound the peculiarities of
each ; or rather, we should not imagine or opine of that
which is incorporeal, such properties as pertain to bodies,
or any thing of the like kind. For no one would ascribe
to bodies the peculiarities of a genuinely imcorporeal
essence. For all of us are familiar with bodies; but the
knowledge of incorporeal natures is attainable by us with
great difficulty; because, through not being able to
behold them intuitively, we are involved in doubt about
their nature; and this takes place as long as we are under
the dominion of imagination.

Thus, therefore, you should say, If that which is in
place, is out of, or has departed from itself, through

224 AUXILIARIES TO THE

having proceeded into bulk, that which is intelligible
is not in place, and is in itself, because it has not
proceeded into corporeal extension. Hence, if the for-
mer is an image, the latter is an archetype. And the
former, indeed, derives its being through the intelligible ;
but the latter subsists in [and through] itself. For every
[physical] image is the image of intellect. It is also
requisite that, calling to mind the peculiarities of both
these, we should not wonder at the discrepance which
takes place in their congress with each other; if, in
short, it is proper on this occasion to use the word
congress. For we are not now surveying the congress of
bodies, but of things which are entirely distinct from
each other, according to peculiarity of hypostasis. Hence,
also, this congress is different from every thing which is
usually surveyed in things essentially the same. Neither,
therefore, is it temperament, or mixture, or conjunction,
or apposition, but subsists in a way different from all
these ; appearing, indeed, in all the mutual participations
of consubstantial natures, in whatever way this may be
effected; but transcending every thing that falls under
the apprehension of sense. Hence, an intelligible essence
is wholly present without interval, with all the parts of
that which has interval, though they should happen to be
infinite im number. Nor is it present distributed into
parts, giving a part to a part; nor being multiplied, does
it multitudinonsly impart itself to multitude; but it is
wholly present with the parts of that which is extended
into bulk, and with each individual of the multitude, and
all the bulk impartibly, and without plurality, and as
numerically one. But it pertains to those natures to
enjoy it partibly, and in a distributed manner, whose
power is dissipated into different parts. And to these it
frequently happens, that through a defect of their own
nature, they counterfeit an intelligible essence ; so that
doubts arise respecting that essence, which appears to
have passed from its own nature into theirs.

36. Truly-existing being is neither great nor small,

PERCEPTION. ΟΕ INTELEIGIBLE:- NATURES. 220

for magnitude and parvitude are properly the peculiarities
of bulk. But true being transcends both magnitude and
parvitude; and is above the greatest, and above the
least ; and is numerically one and the same, though it is
found to be simultaneously participated by every thing
that is greatest, and every thing that is least. You must
not, therefore, conceive of it as something which is
greatest; as you will then be dubious how, being: that
which is greatest, it is present with the smallest masses,
without being diminished or contracted. Nor must you
conceive of it as something which is least; since you will
thus again be. dubious how, being that which is least, it is
present with the greatest masses, without being multi-
plied or increased, or without receiving addition. - But at
one and the same time receiving into the greatest magni-
tude that which transcends the greatest bulk, and into
the least magnitude that which transcends the least *, you
will be able to conceive how the same thing, abiding
in itself, may be simultaneously seen in any casual mag-
nitude, and in infinite multitudes and corporeal masses.
For according to its own peculiarity,’ it is present with
the magnitude of the world impartibly and without mag-
nitude. It also antecedes the bulk of the world, and
comprehends every part of it, in its own impartibility ; just
as, vice versa, the world, by its multitude of parts, is mul-
tifariously present, as far as it is able, with truly-existing
being, yet cannot comprehend it, neither with the whole
of its bulk, nor the whole of its power; but meets with
it in all its parts as that which is infinite, and ‘cannot be
passed beyond; and this both in other respects, and

« In the original, αλλα τὸ exCsCunog τὸν μέγιστον ογκοῦ, εἰς τὸ μέγιστον, καὶ
wr ἔλαχιστον εἰς τὸ ἐλαχίστον, aua λαΐων, κατ. This Holstenius most
erroneously translates, “ Verum id quod maximam molem intervalle
maximo, et minimam minimo excedit simul sumens, &c.” . For a truly
incorporeal nature, such as that of which Porphyry is now speaking, has
nothing to do with interval, and, therefore, does not by interval surpass
either the greatest or the least corporeal mass; but is received
transcendently by the greatest and the least magnitude. .

Q

26Ὁϑ. AUXILIARIES TO THE

because truly-existing being is entirely free from all cor-
poreal extension.

37. That which is greater in bulk, is less in. power,
when compared, not with things of a similar kind, bat
with those that are of a different species, os of a different
essence. For bulk is, as it were, the departure of a
thing from itself, and a division of power into the smallest
parts. Hence, that which transcends in power, is foreign
from all bulk. For.power proceeding into itself, is filled
with itself, and, by corroborating itself, obtains its proper
strength ; on which account, body proceeding into bulk
through a diminution of power, is as much remote from
truly-incorporeal being, as that which truly exists is from
being exhausted by bulk; for the latter abides in the
magnitude of the same power, through an exemption
from bulk. As, therefore, truly-existing being is, with
reference to a corporeal mass, without magnitude and
without bulk; thus also, that which is corporeal is, with
reference to truly-existing being, imbecile and powerless.
For that which is greatest by magnitude of power, is
exempt from all bulk; so that the world existing every
where, and, as it is said, meeting with real being which ig
truly every where, is not able to comprehend the magni-
tude of its power. It meets, however, with true being,
which is not partibly present with it, but is. present with-
out magnitude, and without any definite limitation. The
presence, therefore, of truly-existing being with the world,
is not local, but assimilative, so far as it 1s possible
for body to be assimilated to that which is corporeal,
and for that which is incorporeal to be surveyed in
a body assimilated to it. Hence, an incorporeal nature is
not present with body, so far as it is not possible for. that
which is material to. be assimilated to a perfectly imma~
terial nature; and it is present, so far as a corporeal can
be assimilated to an incorporeal essence. Nevertheless,
this is not ‘effected through reception; since, if it were,
each would be. corrupted. For the material, indeed, in
receiving the immaterial nature, would be corrupted;

PERCEPTION ΟΕ INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 227

through being changed into it; and the immaterial
essence would become material. Assimilations, therefore,
and participations of powers, and the deficiency. of power,
proceed into things which are thus different in essence
from each other, into each other. The world, therefore;
is very far from possessing the power of real being; and
real being is very remote from the imbecility of a materiat
nature. But that which subsists between these, assimi-
lating and being assimilated, and conjoining the extremes
to each other, becomes the cause of deception about the
“extremes, In consequence of applying, through the assi- '
milation, the one to the other.

38. Truly-existing being is said to be many things, not
by a subsistence in different places, nor in the measures of
bulk, nor by coacervation, nor by the circumscriptions or
comprehensions‘ of divisible parts, but by a difference
which is immaterial, without bulk, and without plurality,
and which is-divided according to multitude. Hence,
also, it is one ; not as one body, nor as in one place; nor
as one bulk; nor as one which is many things; because
it is different so far as it is one, and its difference is both
divided and united. For its difference is not externally
acquired, nor adscititious, nor obtained through the par-
ticipation of something else, but it is many things from’
itself. For, remaining one, it energizes with all energies,
because, through sameness, it constitutes all difference ;
not being surveyed in the difference of one thing with
respect to another, as is the case.in bodies. For, on the
. contrary, in these, unity subsists in difference; because
_ diversity has in them a precedaneous existence ; but the
unity which they contain is externally and adscititiously
derived. For in truly existing being, indeed, unity and -
sameness precede ; but difference is generated, from this
unity being energetic. Hence, true being ts multiplied tx
smpartibility ; but body ts untied in multitude and bulk. The

' For διαληψεσιν, here, I read καταληψέσιν, and Holsténius also has ia
this place comprehensionibus.

228 . +.’ AUXILIARIES TO THE

former also “18 established in itself, subsisting in itself
according to unity; but the latter is never in itself,
because it receives its hypostasis in an extension of
existence. The former, therefore, is an all-energetic one ;
but the latter is an anited multitude. Hence, it is requi-
site to explore how the former is one and different; and
again, how the latter is multitude and one: Nor must we
transfer the peculiarities of the one to those which per-
tain to the other.

39. It is not proper to think that the multitude of
souls was generated on account of the multitude of
bodies; but it is necessary.to admit that, prior to bodies,
there were many souls, and one soul [the cause of the
manyj. Nor does the one and whole soul prevent the
subsistence in it of many souls; nor do the multitude of
souls distribute by division the one soul into themselves.
For they are distinct from, but are not abscinded from
the soul, which ranks as a whole; nor do they distribute
into minute parts. this whole soul into themselves. They
are also present with each other without confusion; nor
do they produce the whole soul by coacervation. For
they are not separated from each other by any boundaries;
nor, again, are they confused with each other; just as
neither are many sciences confused in one soul [by which
they are. possessed]. For these sciences do not subsist
in the soul like bodies, as things of a different essence
from it; but they are‘certain energies of the soul. For
the nature of soul possesses an infinite power. Every
thing also that occurs in it is soul; and all souls are [in w
certain respect] one; and again, the soul which ranks ag’
a whole, is different from all the rest. For. as bodies,
though divided to infinity, do not end:in that which is
incorporeal, but alone: receive a difference of segments:
according to bulk; thus also ‘soul, being a vital form;
may be conceived to consist of forms ad tnfinitumi ᾿ς. For
it possesses specific differences, and the whole of it sub-
_ gists together. with, or without these. For, if there is in
the soul that which is as it were a part divided from the:

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 229

rest of the parts, yet, at the same time that there is dif-
ference, the sameness remains. . If, however, in bodies, in
which difference predominates over sameness, nothing
incorporeal- when it accedes- cuts: off ‘the. union, but all
΄ the parts remain essentially anited, and are. divided by _
qualities and: other forms; what ought we to assert. and
conceive of a specific incorporeal. life, in which sameness
is more prevalent than difference; to. which: nothing
foreign to form is subjected, and from which the union of
bodies is derived? Nor does body, when it. becomes.con-
nected with soul, cut off its union, though it is an impe-
diment to its energies in many respects. But the same-
ness of soul produces and discovers all things. through
itself, through its specific energy, which. proceeds to
infinity; since any part of it whatever is eapable of
effecting all things, when it is-liberated and purified from
a conjunction with bodies; just.as any part of seed pos-
sesses the power of the whole seed. As, however, seed,
_when it is united with matter, predominates over. it,
according to each of the productive principles which the
seeds contain; and all the seed, its power being collected
into one, possesses the whole of its power in each of the
parts; thus: also, in the immaterial soul, that which may
be conceived as a part, has the power of the whole soul.
But that part of it which verges to matter, is vanquished,
indeed, by the form to whieh it verges, and yet-is adapted
to associate with immaterial form, though it is. connected
with matter, when withdrawing itself from .a material
nature, it is converted to itself. Since, however, through
verging to matter, it becomes in want of all things, and
suffers an emptiness of its proper power; but when it.is
elevated to intellect, is found to. possess a plenitude of: all
its powers; hence those who first obtained a knowledge
of this plenitude of the soul, very. properly. indicated its
emptiness by calling it poverty, and its fulness s by de-
nominating it satiety.

230 AUXILIARIES TO THE

SECTION III.

40. The ancients, wishing to exhibit to us the pecu-
liarity of incorporeal being, so far as this can be effected
by words, when they assert that it is one, immediately
add, that it is likewise all things; by which they signified
that it is not some one® of thé things which are known
by the senses. Since, however, we suspect that this
mcorporeal one is different from sensibles, in conse-
quence of not perceiving this total one, which is all
things according to one, in a sensible nature, and which
is so because this one is all things : — hence the ancients
added, that it ἐδ one so far as one; in order that we might
understand that what is all things in truly existing being,
is something uncompounded, and that we might with-
draw ourselves from the conception of a coacervation.
When hkewise they say that it is every where, they add
that it is no where. When also they assert that it is in
all things, they add, that it is no where in every thing.
Thus, too, when they say, that it 1s in all things, and in
every divisible nature which is adapted to receive it, they
add, that it is a whole in a whole. And, in short, they
render it manifest to us, through contrary peculiarities ;
at one and the same time assuming these, in order that
we may exterminate, from the apprehension of it, the
fictitious conceptions which are derived from bodies, and
which obscure the cognoscible peculiarities of real being.

41. When you have assumed an eternal essence,
infinite in itself according to power, and begin to perceive
‘ intellectually an hypostasis unwearied, untamed, and
never-farling, but transcending in the most pure and

. 8 In the original, πκαϑὸ ey τὶ τῶν κατ᾿ αἰσθϑησιν συνεγνωσμανωγ; but it
appears to me to be necessary, after χαϑο, to insert the words οὐχ tore,
For incorporeal being is not like some one of the things which are
known by the senses, because no one of these is ore, and, at the same
time, all things. Holstenius did not perceive the necessity of this
emendation, as is evident from his version of the passage.

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 29]

genuine life, and full from itself; and which is likewise
established in itself, satisfied with, and seeking ‘nothing
but itself:—-to this essence, if you add a subsistence
in place, or a relation to a certain thing, at the same time
that you [appear to] diminish it, by ascribing to it an
indigence of place, or a relative condition of being, you
do not [in reality] diminish this essence, but you separate
yourself from the perception of it, by receiving as a veil
the phantasy which runs under your conjectural appre-
hetision of it. For you cannot pass beyond, or stop, or
render mote perfect, or effect the least change in a thing .
of this kind, because it is impossible for it to be in the
smallest degree deficient. For it is much more. never-
failing than any perpetually flowing fountain can be con-
ceived to be. If, however, you are unable to keep pace
with it, and to become assimilated to the intelligible all,
you should not investigate any thing pertaining to real
being ; or, if you do, you will deviate from the path that
leads to it, and will look to something else. - But if you
investigate nothing else, being established in yourself and
your own essence, you will be assimilated to the intel-
_ligible universe, and will not adhere to any thing pos-
terior to it. Neither, therefore, should you say, I am of a
great magnitude. For, omitting this greatness, you will
become universal; though you were universal prior to
this. But, together with the universal, something else
was present with you, and you became less by the addi-
tion; because the addition was not from truly-éxisting
being. For to that you cannot add any thing. When,
therefore, any thing is added from non-being, a place
is afforded to Poverty as an associate, accompanied by
an indigence of all things. Hence, dismissing non-being,
you will then become sufficient to yourself". For he will
not return properly to himself who does not dismiss things

h Immediately after this something is wanting in the original, (as is
evident from the asterisks,) which, as it appears to me, no conjecture
can appropriately supply.

222 . AUXILIARIES TO FHE

of a more vile and abject nature, and who opines himself
to be something naturally small, and not to be such as he
truly is. For thus he, at one and the same time, departs
both from himself, and from truly-existing being.. When,
also, any one is presemt with that which is present. in
himself, then he is present with true being, which is every
where. . But when you withdraw from yourself, then,.
likewise, you recede from real being; —of such great
consequence is it, for a man to be present with that which.
is present with himself, [i.e. with his rational part], and
to be absent from that which is external to him.

If, however, true being is present with us, but non-
being is absent, and real being is not present with us in
conjunction with other things [of a nature foreign to it];
it does not accede in order that it may be present, but, we
depart from it, when it is not present [with things of
a different nature]. And why should this be considered
as wonderful? For you when present are not absent from
yourself; and yet you are not present with yourself,
though present. And you are both present with and
absent from yourself when you survey other things, and
omit to behold yourself. If, therefore, you are thus
.present, and yet not [in reality] present with yourself,
and on this account are ignorant of yourself, and in a
greater degree discover all things, though remote from
your essence, than yourself, with which you are naturally
present, why should you wonder if that which is not
present is remote from you who are remote from it, ᾿
because you have become remote from yourself? For, by
how much the more you are [truly] present with yourself,
though it is present, and inseparably conjoined with you,
by so much the more will you be present with real being,
which is so essentially united to you, that it is as impos-
sible for it to be divulsed from you, as for you to. be
separated from yourself. So that it is universally pos--
sible to know what is present with real being, and what
is absent from it, though it is every where present, and
again is also no where. For those who are able to pro

<
~

PERCEPTION. OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 233

ceed into their own essence intellectually, and to obtain
8 knowledge of it, will, in the knowledge itself; and the
science accompanying this knowledge, be able to recover
er regain. theniselves, through the union of that ‘which
knows with that which is known. And with those, who
are present with ‘themselves, truly-existing being will
also be present,. But from such as abandon the proper
being of themselves to other -things,—from these, as they
are absent from themselves, true being will ‘also be
absent. If, however, we are naturally adapted to bé
established in-the same essence, to be rich from our-
selves, and not to descend to that which we are not;-in
so doing becoming in want of ourselves, and thus again
associating with Poverty, though Porus' [or Plenty] is
present;— and if we are cut off from real being, from:
which we are not separated either by place, or essence;
nor by. any thing. else, through our conversion to non-
being, we suffer as a just pupishment of our abandon-
ment of true. bemg, ἃ departure from, and ignorance
of ourselves. And again, by a proper attention to, we
recover ourselves, and become united to divinity. It is,
therefore, rightly said, that the soul is confined in body
as in a prison, and is there detained in chains like a
fugitive slave*. We should, however, [earnestly] en-
deavour to be liberated from our bonds. For, through
‘being converted to these sensible objects, we desert our-
selves, though we are of a divine origin, and are, as
Empedocles ‘says,

Heaven's exiles, straying from the orb of light.

‘ In the original, sas δια τούτων πάλιν τὴ wine σύγειναι, χαιπῈρ wacerres
αὐτου; but for αὐτου, I rend πόρου; as it appears to me that Porphyry is.
here alluding to what is said by Diotima, in the Banquet of Plato, con-
cerning the parents of Love, viz. that they are Poverty and Porus, or
Plenty.

k See the Phado of Plato. But something i is here wanting in the
original, as is evident not only from the asterisks, but from the want of
connexion in the words themselves,

484 - . ΑὔΧΙΣΙΆΒΙΕΒ TO THE

So that every depraved life is full of servitude; and on .
this account is without God and unjust, the spirit im
it .being' full of impiety, and consequently of injustice.
And thus, aguin,.it is rightly said, that justice ms to be
found in the performance of that which is the province of
him who performs it. The image also of true justice
consists in distributing to each of those with whom: we
live, that which is due to the desert of each. .

42. That which possesses its existence in another
[ἐὶ δ. ἴῃ something different from itself], ‘and is not essen
tialized in itself, separably from another, if it should be
converted to itself, in order to know itself, without that mn
which it is essentialized, withdrawing itself from it}
would be corrupted by this knowledge, in consequence of
separating itself from its essence. But that which is able
to know itself without the subject in which it exists, and
is able to withdraw itself from this subject, without the
destruction of itself, cannot be essentialized in that, from
which it is capable of converting: itself to itself, without
being corrupted, and of knowing itself by its own enér-
gies. Hence, if sight, and every sensitive power, neither
perceives itself, nor apprehends or preserves itself by
separating itself from body; but intellect, when it sepa-
rates itself from body, then especially perceives intel-
lectually, is converted to itself, and is. not corrupted ;— ait
is evident that the sensitive powers obtain the power of
energizing through the body; but that intellect possesses
its energies and its essence not in body, but in itself.

43. Incorporeal natures are properly denominated,
and conceived to be what they are, according to a pri-
vation of body ; just as, according to the ancients, matter,
and the form which is in matter, and also natures.and
{physical] powers, are apprehended by an abstraction
from matter. And after the same manner place, time, and
the boundaries of things, are apprehended. For all such
things are denominated according to a privation of body.
There are likewise other things which are said to be
incorporeal improperly, not according to a privation οὗ

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 2386

body, but, in short, because they are not naturally. adapted
to generate. body'.- Hence those of the former signifir
cation subsist in bodies;. but those of the second are
perfectly separated from bodies, and from those incor-
poreal natures which subsist.about bodies For bodies,
indeed, are in place, and boundaries are.in. body. Bat
intellect, and intellectual reason, neither. subsist in place
nor in body; nor proximately give existence to bodies,
nor subsist together. with bodies, or with those. incor-
poreal natures which are denominated according to a
privation of bodies. Neither, therefore, if a certain
incorporeal vacuum should be conceived to exist, would
it be possible for intellect to be in a.vacuum. Fora
vacuum may be the recipient of bady ; but it is imposr
sible that it should be the recipient of intellect, and afford
a place for its energy.. Since, however, the genus of an
mncorporeal nature appears.to be twofold, one of these
the followers of Zeno do not at all admit, but they adopt
the other; and perceiving that the former is not such as
the latter, they entirely subvert it, though they ought
rather to conceive that it is of another genus, and not
- to fancy that, because it is not the latter, it has no
existence. .

44. Intellect and the intelligible are one thing, and
sense and that which is sensible another. And the intel-
ligible, indeed, is conjoined with intellect, but that which
is sensible with sense. Neither, however, can sense by
itself apprehend itself ** *, But the intelligible, which

1 j.e. They are not adapted to be the immediate causes of body,
because they are perfectly separated from it. The original is, sd δὲ w
ἀλλα καταχρησίριως λεγομῖνα ασωμώτα, οὐ κατα clenow σωματος, κατα δὲ ολως μη
ψεφυκέναι γέγγαν σωμα. Holstenius, not understanding what is here said by

' Porphyry, translates the words xara δὲ cdwe μιη πεφυκέναι γέενναν copa, “* sed

quod naullum omnino corpus generare possunt.” For Porphyry, as is
evident from what immediately follows, is here speaking of natures
which are perfectly separated from bodies, and which are, therefore, not Ὁ
naturally adapted to be the immediate generators of them, not through
any deficiency, but through transcendency of power,

86. | AUXILIARIES TO THE

ig conjoined with intellect, and intellect, which is con-
joined with the intelligible, by no means fall under the
perception of sense. Intellect; however, is intelligible to
intellect. But if intellect is the intelligible. object of
intellect, intellect ‘will be its own intelligible object. If,
therefore, intellect is an intellectual and not a sensible
‘object, it will be intelligible. But if it is intelligible to
intellect, and not to sense, it will also be intelligent... The
same. thing, therefore, will be that which is intelligent,
or intellectually: perceives, and which is intellectually per-
ceived, or is intelligible; and this will be true of the
whole with respect to the whole; but not as he who
rubs, and he who is rubbed. Intellect, therefore, does
not intellectually perceive by one part, and. is intel-
lectually perceived by another: for it is impartible, and
the whole is an intelligible object of the whole. It. is
likewise wholly intellect, having nothing in itself which
can be conceived to be deprived of intelligence. Hence
one part of it does not intellectually perceive, but not
another part of it™. For, so far as it does not intel-
lectually perceive, it will be unintelligent. Neither, there-
fore, departing from this thing, does it pass on to that.
For of that from which it departs, it has no intellectual
perception. But if there is no transition in its intel-
lections, it intellectually perceives all things at once.
If, therefore, it understands all things at once, and not
this thing now, but another afterwards, it understands
all things instantaneously and always * * **.

Hei ce, if all things are instantaneously per ceived by
it, its perceptions have nothing to do with the past and

m In the original, 3:0 ours reds sy ἑαυτοὺ vost, rods δὲ ov vost, which Hol-
stenius erroneously translates, “ Ideoque non quidem unam sui partem
intelhgit, alteram vero non intelligit.” For Porphyry is not here speak-
ing. of intellect surveying its parts, but of its being wholly intellective,
This is evident from what immediately follows.

-™ The-asterisks in the original denote something is wanting. Neves
theless, what immediately fallows them, is 5. evidently connected with.
what. immediately precedes,

PERCEPTION OF INTELLIGIBLE NATURES. 237

the future, but subsist in an indivisible untemporal, now;
so that the simultaneous, both according to multitude,
and according to temporal interval, are. present. with
intellect. Hence, too, all things subsist in it according
to one, and in one, without interval, and without. time.
But if this be the case, theré is nothing discursive
or transitive in its intellections, and consequently they
are without motion. Hence, they are energies ‘according
to one, subsisting in one, and without increase or muta-
tion, or any transition. If, however, the multitude sub-
sists according to one, and the energy 18 collected
together at once, and without time, an essence of this
kind must necessarily always subsist in [an intelligible]
one. But this is eternity. Hence, eternity is present
with intellect. That nature, however, which does. not
perceive intellectually according to one, and in one, but
transitively, and with motion, so that in understanding it
leaves one thing and apprehends another, divides and
proceeds discursively, — this nature [which is soul] sub
sists In conjunction with time. For with a motion of this
kind, the future and. the past are consubsistent. -But.
soul, changing its conceptions, passes from one thing to
another; not that the prior conceptions depart, and
the posterior accede in their place, but there is, as it
were, a transition of the former, though they remain
in the soul, and the latter accede, as if from some other
place. They do not, however, accede in reality from
another place ; but they appear to do so in consequence
of the self-motion. of the soul, and through her eye being
directed to a survey of the different forms which she con-
tains, and which have the relation of parts to her whole
essence. For she resembles a fountain not flowing out-
wardly, but circularly scattering its streams into itself.
With the motion, therefore, of soul, time is consub-
sistent; but eternity: 18 consubsistent with the perma-
nency of intellect in itself*. [{ is not, however, divided

© See the fourth book of my translation of Proclus, on the Timeus of
Plato, in which the nature of time and eternity is most admirably

238 AUXILIARIES, ETC.

from intellect in the same manner as time is from soul ;
because in intellect the consubsistent essences are united.
But that which 1s perpetually moved, is the source of
a false opinion of eternity, through the immeasurable
extent of its motion producing a conception of eternity.
And that which abides [in one,] is falsely conceived to be
the-same with that which is fperpetually] moved. For
that which is perpetually moved, evolves the time of
itself in the same manner as the now of itself, and mul-.
tiplies it, according to a temporal progression. Hence,
some have apprehended that time is to be surveyed in
permanency no less than in motion ; and that eternity, as
we have said, is infinite time; just as if each of these
imparted its own properties to the other; time, which
is always moved, adumbrating eternity by the perpetuity of .
itself, and the sameness of its motion ; and eternity, through
being established in sameness of energy, becoming similar
to time, by the permanency of itself arising from energy.
In sensibles, however, the time of one thing is distimct
from that of another. Thus, for instance, there is one
time of the sun, and another of the moon, one time of the
morning-star, and another of each of the planets. Hence,
also, there is a different year of different planets. ‘The
year, likewise, which comprehends these times, termi-
nates as in a summit in the motion of the soul fof
the universe,] according to the imitation of-which the
celestial orbs are moved. The motion of this soul, how-
ever, being of a different nature from that of the planets,
the time of the former also is different from that of
the latter. For the latter subsists with interval, and
- 1s distinguished from the former by local motions and
transitions. |

unfolded. See, also, my translation of Plotinus, on Eternity and Time.
In these works, what both these divine men have said of eternity, and
what the former has said of time, contains, as it appears to me, the

ne plus ultra of philosophical investigation on these most abstruse
subjects.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

ON

THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

ne ee et

In my History of the Restoration of the Platonic Theo-
logy [see Vo]. II. of my Proclus on Euclid,] and in a
note accompanying my translation of the treatise of Por-
phyry, on the Cave of the Nymphs, in that work, 1
attempted, from the hints afforded by Porphyry, and the
work of an anonymous Greek writer, De Ulyxis Error-
ibus, to unfold the latent meaning of the wanderings
of Ulysses, as narrated by Homer. But as, from my con- ᾿
tinued application to the philosophy of Plato for upwards
of forty years, I now know much more of that philosophy
than’ I then did, a period of thirty-five years having
elapsed from that to the present time, I shall again
attempt to explain those wanderings, rejecting some
things, and retaining others which I had adopted before.

In the first place, it is necessary to observe, that
Ulysses does not rank among the first heroic characters,
or in other words, he was not one of those heroes who
descend into the regions of mortality at certain periods,
not only in compliance with that necessity through which
all partial souls such- as ours descend periodically, but
also for the purpose of benefiting others, and leading
them back to their pristine state of perfection. Hence,
he was by no.means such an exalted hero as Hercules, or
Pythagoras, or Socrates, or Plato; for they largely bene-

. R ᾿

242 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

fited others ; but he only benefited himself. For all his
companions perished prior to his arrival at Ithaca. So
that he was able to save himself, but not others.
“ Hence,” says Olympiodorus, in his MS. Scholia on the
Gorgias of Plato, ‘‘ it is said, that Ulysses wandered on
the sea by the will of Neptune. For by this it is
signified that the Odyssean life was neither terrestrial, nor
yet celestial, but between these. Since, therefore, Nep-
tune is the lord of the middle natures, on this account it
is said, that Ulysses wandered through the will of Nep-
tune, because he had a Neptunian allotment. Thus, also,
theologists speak of the sons of Jupiter, Neptune, and
Pluto; regarding the allotment of each. For we say, that
he who has a divine and celestial polity, is the son of
Jupiter; that he who has a terrestrial polity, is the son of
Pluto; and he is the son of Neptune, whose polity or
allotment is between these*.” Hence Ulysses, from his
Neptunian allotment, was a man who ranked among the
middle class of characters that transcend the majority of
mankind. .

In the next place, in order to understand accurately
the recondite meaning of the wanderings of Ulysses, it is
requisite to know what the most divine and theological
poet Homer indicates by the Trojan war in the Iliad. For
Homer, by combining fiction with historical facts, has
delivered to us some very occult, mystic, and valuable
information, in those two admirable peems, the Ilhad and
,Odyssey. Hence, by those who directed their attention .
to this recondite information, he was said, conformably
to the tragical mode of speaking, which was usual with
the most ancient writers, to have been blind, because, as

2 Ala vos τοῦτο, καὶ τὸν Οδυσσεα Asyouct κατα ϑαλάτταν waavarbas Coudn rev
Ἰοσειδωνος" σημαίνουσι γὰρ τὴν Οδυσσειον Cony, ors οὐδὲ χθονια ny, adr cute penv ἐπε
ονραγια, αλλα μιᾶση' sire: οὐγ o Ποσειδὼν rou μεταξυ κύριος εσῖι, δια τουτὸ καὶ “τον
Οδυσσεα φασι Govrn Ποσειδωγος [supple πλανασθαι!"} ἐπειδὴ τὸν xAnpov τοῦ Ποσειδωγος

. LX EV. CUTO γοῦν και τοὺς LEY φασι Διὸς υιους, τοὺς δὲ ἸΠοσειδωγος, τοὺς δὲ Πλούτωνος,

argog τοὺς κληροὺς exacglou* τὸν μὲν γὰρ ἔχοντα Seay xas oupaviay πολιτείαν Asoc
φάμεν usev, τὸν δὲ χθογιαν, Πλουτῶνος, τὸν δὲ τηῦ μεταξὺ Ποσειδωνος.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 243

Proclus observes’, he separated himself from sensible
beauty, and extended the intellect of his soul to invisible ~
and true harmony. He was said, therefore, to be blind,
because that intellectual beauty to which he raised him-
self cannot be perceived by corporeal eyes. Thus, too,
Orpheus is tragically said to have been lacerated in
an all-various manner, because men of that age partially
participated of his mystic doctrine. The princzpal part of
it, however, was received by the Lesbians; and on this
account, his head, when separated from his body, is said
to have been carried to Lesbos. Hence, the Platonic
Hermeas, conformably to this opinion of the occult
meaning of the Iliad, beautifully explains as follows’ the
Trojan war, in his Scholia on the Phedrus of Plato:

“ By Ion, we must understand the generated and
material place, which is so denominated from mud and
matter (παρα τὴν ἰλυν καὶ τὴν vany,) and in which there are
war and sedition. But the Trojans are material forms,
and all the lives which subsist about bodies. Hence,
also, the Trojans are called genustne (ιθαγενεις). For all the
lives which subsist about bodies, and irrational® souls,
are favourable and attentive to their proper matter. On
the contrary, the Greeks are rational souls, coming from
Greece, 2. 6. from the intelligible into matter. Hence, the
Greeks are called foreigners (επηλυδὲς,)} and vanquish the
Trojans, as being of a superior order. But they fight
with each other about the image of Helen, as the poet
says [about the image of Eneas].

Around the phantom Greeks and Trojans fight®.

Helen signifying intelligible beauty, being a certain vessel
(ελενοη τις ovca,) attracting to itself intellect. An efflux,
therefore, of this intelligible beauty is imparted to matter

> In Plat. Polit. p. 398.

© Instead of avadcyes ψυχαι, in this place, it is necessary to read
ἀλογοι ψυχαι.

ἀ Iliad, V. ν. 451.

a

244 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

through Venus; and about this efflux of beauty the
Greeks fight with the Trojans [. 6. rational with irrational
lives*]. And those, indeed, that oppose and vanquish
matter, return to the intelligible world, which is their
true country; but those who do not, as is the case with
the’ multitude, are bound to matter. As, therefore, the ©
prophet, in the tenth book of the Republic, previously to
‘the:descent of souls, announces to them how they may
return [to their pristine felicity], according to periods of
a thousand and ten thousand years; thus, also, Calchas
predicts to the. Greeks their return in ten years, the
number ten being the symbol of a perfect period. And
as, in the lives of souls, some are elevated through philo-
sophy, others through ‘the amatory art, and others through
the royal and wailike disciplines; so with respect to the
Greeks, some act with rectitude through prudence, but
others through war or love, and their return is different
[according to their different pursuits].” :
The first obviously fabulous’ adventure, then, of
Ulysses, is that of the Lotophagi, which Homer beauti-
fully narrates, and whose narration Pope very elegantly .
translates as follows :

. The trees around them all their fruit produce, ᾿
. Lotos the name, and dulcet is the juice ἢ]
-(Thence call’d Lotophagi) which, whoso tastes,
Insatiate riots in the sweet repasts, "
Nor other home, nor other care intends,
But quits his house, his country, and his friends.

© Conformably to this, Proclus, in Plat. Polit. p.398, says, ‘ that
all the beauty subsisting about generation [or the regions of sense], from

“the fabrication of things, is signified by Helen; about which there is

a perpetual battle of souls, till the more intellectual having vanquished
the more irrational forms of life, retarn to the place from whence they
originally came.” For the beauty which is in the realms of generation,
is an efflux of intelligible beauty.

f This second line is, in Pope’s version, ἐς Lotos the 1 name, divine,
nectarious juice!” which I have altered as above, as being more
conformable to the original.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 248

The-three we sent from off th’ enchanting ground
We dragg’d reluctant, and by-force we bound:
The rest in haste forsook the pleasing shore,

Or, the charm tasted, had return’d no more &.

Plato, in the 8th book of his Republic, has admirably

_ unfolded to us what the lotos occultly indicates, viz. that

it signifies ““ false and arrogant reasonings and opinions:”

for daily experience shows. that nothing is more enchant-

Ing and delicious than these to such as have made no’
solid proficiency in virtue, and who, like: some of the

companions of Ulysses, being fascinated by erroneous.
_conceptions, consign their true country and true kindred

to oblivion, and desire to live for ever lost in the intoxica-
tion of fallacious delight.

The next adventure of Ulysses is that of the Cyclops,
whom he deprived of sight, and irritated by reproaches.
But according to Porphyry, in the above-mentioned
excellent treatise, this is no other than the natal demon .
of Ulysses, or the demon to whose protecting power
he became subject, as soon as he was born". In order,
however, to understand perfectly the arcane. meaning
of this fable, it is necessary to observe, that according to
the ancient theology, those souls that in the present life
will speedily return to their pristine felicity in the intelli-
ligible world, have not the essential demon, or the
dzemon which is inseparable from the essence of the soul,
different from the demon that presides over the birth; for
they are one and the same. But the case is otherwise
with more imperfect souls ; as the natal is in these differ-
ent from the essential demon'. As Ulysses, therefore,

6 Lib. ix. 1. 94, &c.

h Vid. Censoris, De Die Natali, cap. ili.

1 This is evident from the following passage in the Commentary of
Proclus, on the First Alcibiades of Plato: Ταῖς μὲν οὖν awoxaracratines
ζωσαις Luyaic o αυτος ἔστιν aves κάγταυϑα δαιμων" ταῖς δὲ ατελεσῆεραις αλλος μεν ὁ
κατ᾽ οὐσίαν δαίμων, αλλος δὲ ὁ xaTa τὸν προβεβλημένον βιογ. ἢ. 37, Edit. Creuz.
But for a copious account of the essential demon, and of the different
orders and offices of demons, see the notes accompanying my translation.
of the First Alcibiades, Phedo, and Gorgias of Plato.

246 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES

does not rank among the more perfect heroic characters,
and was not one who in the present life is immediately
ascending to his kindred star, or, in Platonic language, to
the paternal port, the soul’s true paradise of rest ; but was
a man who, prior to this, had many laborious wanderings
to accomplish, and many difficulties and dangers of no
common magnitude to sustain, his natal was not the
same with his essential demon. As he is, however, -
departing from a sensible to an intellectual life, though
circuitously and slowly, he is represented in so doing as
blinding and irritating his natal demon. For he who
blinds the eye of sense, and extinguishes its light, after
his will has profoundly assented to its use, must expect
punishment for the deed ; as necessary ultimately to his
own ‘peculiar good, and the general order of the universe.
Indeed, troubles and misfortunes: resulting from such
undertakings, not only contribute to appease the anger of
their authors, but likewise purify and benefit the subjects
of their revenge. According to the Greek theology,
therefore, he who, in the present life, while he is in
the road of virtue, and is eagerly searching for wisdom,
perceives that there is a great resemblance between his
destiny and that of Ulysses, may safely conclude, that
either here, or in a prior state of existence, he has volun-
tarily submitted to the power of his natal.demon, and
has now deprived him of sight; or in other words,
has abandoned a life of sense; and that he has been
profoundly delighted with the nature of matter, and is
now abrogating the confessions which he made. This,
too, is insinuated in the beautiful story of Cupid and
Psyche, by Apuleius, when the terrestrial Venus sends
Mercury with a book in which her name is inserbed, to
apprehend Psyche as a fugitive from her mistress. For
this whole story relates to the descent of the soul into
this tetrene body, and its wanderings and punishments,
till it returns to its true country and pristine felicity *.

k See the note (p. 90) accompanying my translation of the Metamor-
phosis of Apuleius,

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 247

In the next fable, which is that of AXolus, the poet
appears to me to signify that providence of divinity
which ‘is of an elevating and guardian nature, the
influence of which, when properly received by the sub-
jects of it, enables them to pass with security over the
stormy sea of life to their native land; but when this
influence is neglected through the sleep of reason, the
- negligence is followed by a temporary destruction of
hope. This providence also of the Gods is not only one, but
all-various, which Homer appears to indicate by Aolus ;
the word aioacs signifying various and manifold. As the
advancement, therefore, of Ulysses in the virtues is as yet
imperfect, extending no farther than to the ethical and
polstical, which are but adumbrations of the true virtues,
the cathartic and theoretic'!, he is said to have fallen
asleep, and to have been thereby disappointed of his wishes,
his soul not being at that time in a truly vigilant state, as
not having yet elevated its eye to real being from objects
of sense which resemble the delusions of dreams.

By the adventure of the Lestrigons, which follows
in the next place, Homer represents to us Ulysses flying.
from voracity, and fierce and savage manners ; a flight
indispensably necessary, as preparatory to his attainment
of the higher virtues.

In the next adventure, which contains the beautiful
allegory of Circe, we shall find some deep arcana of
philosophy contained, exclusive of its connexion with
Ulysses. By the Aéean isle, then, in which the palace of
Circe was situated, the region of sorrow and lamentation
is signified, as is evident from the name of the island
itself. And, by Circe, we must understand the Goddess
of sense. For thus Porphyry, in Stobeus, p. 141:
“ Homer calls the period and revolution of regeneration
in a circle, Circe, the daughter of the Sun, who perpetu-
ally connects and combines all corruption with genera-

' For an accurate account of the gradation of the virtues, ὃ see Por-
phyry’s Auxiliaries to Intelligibles,.p. 217.

248 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

tion, arid. generation again with corruption.” And this
is asserted still more explicitly by Proclus, in his Scholia
on the Cratylus of Plato. For he says, “ Circe is that
divine power which weaves all the life contained in
the four elements, and, at the same time, by her song
harmonizes the whole sublunary world. But the shuttle
with which she weaves, is represented by theologists as
golden, because her essence is intellectual, pure, imma-
terial, and unmingled with generation ; all which is signi-
fied by the shuttle being golden. And her employment
consists in separating™ stable things from such as are
in motion, according to divine diversity.” _ And he also
informs us, ““ that Circe ranks among the divinities who
preside over generation, or the regions of sense.” Homer,
too, with great propriety, represents Circe, who rules over
the realms of generation, as waited on by Nymphs sprung
from fountains; for Nymphs, says Hermias (in Plat.
Phedrum,) are Goddesses who preside over regeneration,
and are the attendants of Bacchus, the son of Semele:
On this account, they are present with water; that is,
they ascend, as it were, into, and rule over generation.
But this Dionysius, or Bacchus, supplies the regeneration -
of every sensible nature.”

Hence we may observe, that the Aean isle, or this
region of sense, is, with great propriety, called the abode
of trouble and lamentation. In this region, then, the
companions of Ulysses, in consequence of being very
imperfect characters, are changed, through the incanta-
tions of the Goddess, into brutes, 2.e. into unworthy and
irrational habits and manners. Ulysses, however, as one
who is returning, though slowly, to the proper perfection
of his nature, is, by the assistance of Mercury, or reason,
prevented from destruction. Hence intellect, roused by
its impassive power, and at the same time armed with
prudent anger, and the plant-moly, or temperance, which
is able to repel the allurements of pleasure, wars on

m For the shuttle is a symbol of separating power.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 249

sensible delight, and prevents the effects of its transform-
ing power. Ulysses, also, though he was not able to lead
his companions back to their native land, the paternal
port of the soul, yet saves them from being transformed,
through the enchantments of sense, into an irrational
life.

After this follows the allegory respecting the descent
of Ulysses into Hades, which occultly signifies, that he
still lived a life according to sense, and not according to
intellect, and that, in consequence of not having yet van- -
quished a terrestrial life, he was involved in obscurity.
For ancient wise men universally considered Hades as com-
mencing in the present state. of existence, and that sense 1s
nothing more than the energy of the dormant soul, and a
perception, as it were, of the delusions of dreams, as I have
abundantly proved in my treatise on the Mysteries. The
secret meaning, also, of what Ulysses saw in Hades, is no
less beautiful than profound, as the following extract
from the manuscript Commentary of Olympiodorus, on
the Gorgias of Plato, abundantly evinces: “ Ulysses,”
says he, “ descending into Hades, saw, among others,
‘Sysiphus, and Tityus, and Tantalus. And Tityus he saw
lying on the earth, and a vulture devouring his liver; the
liver signifying that he lived solely according to the
epithymetic part of his nature [or that part of the soul
which is the source of desires,] and that through this,
indeed, he was, indeed, internally prudent; but earth
signifying the terrestrial condition of his prudence. But
Sysiphus, living under the dominion of ambition and
anger, was employed in continually rolling a stone up an
eminence, because it perpetually descended again; its
descent implying the vicious government of himself; and
his rolling the stone, the hard, refractory, and, as it were,
rebounding condition of his life. And, lastly, he saw
Tantalus extended by the side of a lake, and that there
was a tree before him, with abundance of fruit on its
branches, which he desired to gather, but it vanished
from his view. And this indeed indicates, that he lived

250 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

under the dominion of the phantasy; but his hanging
over the lake, and in vain attempting to drink, denotes
the elusive, humid, and rapidly-gliding condition of such
a life.” :

We must now, however, view Ulysses passing from
sense to imagination; in the course of which voyage he
is assailed by various temptations of great power, and
destructive effect. We shall perceive him victorious in
some of these, and sinking under others; but struggling
against the incursions of all. Among the first of these is
the enchanting melody of the Sirens,

Whose song is death, and makes destruction please.

But what is occultly signified by the Sirens, is beautifully
unfolded by Proclus, on the Cratylus. of Plato, as fol-
lows: “ The divine Plato knew that there are three
kinds of Sirens ; the celestial, which is under the govern- .
ment of Jupiter; that which is effective of generation, and
is under the government of Neptune; and that which ἐς
cathartic, and is under the government of Pluto. It is
common to all these, to incline all things through an
harmonic motion to their ruling Gods. Hence, when the
soul is in the heavens, they are desirous of uniting it to
the divine life which flourishes there. But it 18 proper
that souls living in generation should sail beyond them,
like the Homeric Ulysses, that they may not be allured
by generation, of which the sea is an image. And when
souls are in Hades, the Sirens are desirous of uniting
them through intellectual conceptions to Pluto. So that
Plato knew that in the kingdom of Hades there are
Gods, demons, and souls, who dance, as it were, round
Pluto, allured by the Sirens that dwell there.” Ulysses,
therefore, as now proceeding to a life which is under the
dominion of imagination, but which ig superior to a life
consisting wholly in sensitive energies, abandons those
alluring and fraudulent pleasures of sense, which charm
the soul with flattering and mellifluous incantations.
Hence he closes with divine reasons and energies, as with

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 251

wax, the impulses of desire.and the organs of sense;
so that every passage being barred from access, they may
in- vain warble the song of ecstasy, and expect to ruin the
soul by the enchanting strain. He also restrains the
corporeal assaults by the bands of morality, and thus
employs the senses without yielding to their impetuous
invasions ; and experiences delight without resigning the
empire of reason to its fascinating control.

Ulysses, having escaped the dangers of the Sirens,
passes on to the rocks of Scylla and Charybdis, of terrific
appearance and irresistible force. By these two rocks
the poet seems ‘to signify the passions of anger and —
desire, and their concomitants, that compress human life
on both sides; and which every one must experience
who proceeds, like Ulysses, in a regular manner to an
intellectual state of existence. Some of these are, like
Scylla, of a lofty malignity; fraudulent, yet latent and
obscure, as being concealed in the penetration of the
soul. And such is revenge, and other passions of a
stmilar kind. In these recesses a demon, the prince of
such passions, resides. For the Chaldean oracles assert
that terrestrial demons dwell in the soul, which is replete
with irrational affections". This demon also may justly
be denominated a dire and enraged dog, who partly
exposes his own malice, and partly hides it in impene-
trable obscurity. Hence he is capable of producing mis-
chief in a twofold: respect. For he privately hurts by
. malignant stratagems, openly ravishes the soul on the
lofty rock of fury, and rends it with the triple evil of
deadly teeth, viz. dereliction of duty, hatred of humanity,
and self-conceit. Indeed, a demon of this kind will be
perpetually vigilant in endeavouring to destroy, at one

" And this is the meaning of the Chaldaic oracle, —
Soy ayleroy ϑηρες χθονὸς οἰκησουσίν.
ὁ. 6. “ The wild beasts of the earth shall inhabit thy vessel.” For, as

Psellus well observes, by the vessel, the composite temperature of the ᾿
soul is signified, and by the wild beasts of the earth, terrestrial demons.

252 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

time the whole, and at another time a part of the soul
. of one, struggling, like Ulysses, against passion, and
yielding reluctantly to its invasions.

But. the other affections which pertain to desire are
of a more corporeal nature, and are more conspicuously
_ depraved. A wild fig-tree, %.e. the will, is produced on
the top of this rock ; wild, indeed, on account of its free.
nature, but sweet in fruition; and, under which, often
through the day, the impetuosities of the boiling body
are accustomed to absorb and destroy the man, agitating
upwards and downwards inflamed desire; so that mighty
destruction, both to soul and body, is produced by their
mutual consent. But it is highly proper that a rock of
this last kind should be anxiously avoided by one, who,
like Ulysses, is labouring to return to his true country
_ and friends. *Hence, if necessity requires, he will rather
expose himself to the other: for there the energy of
thought, and of the soul’s simple motions, is alone neces«
sary to be exerted, and it is easy to recover the pristine
habit of the soul. In short, the poet seems to represent,
by this allegory of the two rocks, as well the dangers
which spontaneously arise from the irascible part of the
soul, as those which are the effect of deliberation, and
are of a corporeal nature; both of which must be sus-
tained, or one at least, by a necessary consequence. For
it is impossible that neither of them should be expe-—
rienced .by one who. is passing over.the stormy ocean
of a sensible life.

, After this succeeds the allegory. of the Trinacrian
isle, containing the herds sacred to the God of day,
which were violated by the companions of Ulysses; but
— not without the destruction of the authors of this impiety,
and the most dreadful danger to Ulysses. By the result
of this fable, the poet evidently shows that punishment
attends the sacrilegious and the perjured ; and teaches us
that we should perpetually reverence divinity, with the
greatest sanctity of mind, and be cautious how we com-
mit any thing in divine concerns contrary to piety of

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 253

manners and purity of thought. But Homer, by attri- ©
buting sense to the flesh and hides of the slain herds,
manifestly evinces that every base deed universally pro-
claims the iniquity of its author; but that perjury and
sacrilege are attended with the most glaring indications
of guilt, and the most horrid signatures of approaching
vengeance and inevitable ruin. We may here, too, ob-
serve, that the will of Ulysses was far from consenting
to this impious deed; and that, though his passions ἡ
prevailed at length over his reason, it was not till after
frequent admonition had been employed, and great dili-
gence exerted, to prevent its execution. This, indeed, —
is so eminently true, that his guilt was the consequence
of surprise, and not of premeditated design; which ἡ
Homer appears to insinuate by relating that Ulysses was
asleep when his associates committed the offence.

In the next fable we find Ulysses, impelled by the
southern wind towards the rocks of Scylla and Charybdis ;_-
in the latter of which he found safety, by clinging |
to the fig-tree which grew on its summit, till she refunded
the mast, on which he rode after*the tempest. But the
secret meaning of the allegory appears to me to be as
follows : — Ulysses, who has not yet taken leave of a life
according to sense, is driven by the warmth of passion,
represented by the southern gales, into the dire vortex of
insane desires, which frequently boiling over, and tossing
on high the storms of depraved affections, plunges into’
ruin the soul obnoxious ‘to its waves. However, per-
ceiving the danger to which he is exposed, when the
base storms begin to swell, and the whirlpools of de-
pravity roar, he seizes the helm of temperance, and binds
himself fast to the solid texture of his remaining virtue.
The waves of desire are, indeed, tempestuous in the —
extreme; but before he is forcibly merged, by the rage "
of:the passions, into the depths of depravity, he tena--’
ciously adheres to his unconsenting will,’ seated, as it
were, on the lofty summit of terrene desire. For this,
like the wild fig-tree, affords the best refuge to the soul

254 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.
3 , ᾿ .

struggling with the billows of base perturbations. Hence
he thus recovers the integrity which he had lost, and
afterwards swims without danger over the waves of
temptation; ever watchful and assiduous, while he sails
through this impetuous river of the flesh, and is exposed
to the stormy blasts of heated passion and destructive
vice. Hence, too, while he is thus affected, and anxious
lest the loss from unworthy affections should return upon
himself, he will escape being lacerated by the teeth of
Anger, though she should terribly and fiercely bark in
the neighbourhood of Desire, and endeavour, like Scylla, .
to snatch him on her lofty rock. For those who are
involuntarily disturbed, like Ulysses, by the billows of
Desire, suffer no inconvenience from the depraved rock
of Wrath; but considering the danger of their present
situation, they relinquish the false confidence produced
by rage for modest diffidence and anxious hope.

Hitherto we have followed Ulysses in his voyage
over the turbulent and dangerous ocean of sense; in
which we have seen him struggling against the storms
of temptation, and in* danger of perishing through the
tempestuous billows of vice. We must now attend him
in the region of imagination, and mark his progress from
‘the enchanted island, till he regains the long-lost empire
of his soul. That the poet then, by Calypso, occultly
signifies the phantasy or imagination, is, I think, evident
from his description of her abode. For she is represented
as. dwelling in a cavern, illuminated by a great fire; and
this cave is surrounded with a thick wood, is watered by
four fountains, and is situated in an island, remote from
any habitable place, and environed by the mighty ocean.
All which particulars correspond with the phantasy, as I
presume the following observations will evince. In the
first place, the primary and proper vehicle of the phan-
tasy, or, as it is called by the Platonic philosophers, the
imaginative spirit, is attenuated and ethereal, and is there-
fore naturally luminous. In the next place, the island
is said to be surrounded with a thick wood, which

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 255

evidently corresponds to a material nature, or this body,
with which the phantasy is invested. For vay, or matter,
also signifies a wood. But the four fountains, by which
the cave is watered, occultly signify the four gnostic
powers of the soul, entellect, the discursive energy of reason,
opinion, and sense; with all which the phantasy, being also
a gnostic power, communicates ; so that it receives images,
hike a mirror, from all of them, and retains those which
it receives from the senses, when the objects by which
they were produced are no longer present. Hence the
imagination, or the phantasy, [φαντασια,] is denominated
from being τῶν φανεντων class, the permanency of ap-
pearances. And, in the last place, the island is said to be
environed by the ocean; which admirably accords with
a corporeal nature, for ever flowing, without admitting
any penods of repose. And thus much for the secret
agreement of the cavern and island with the region of
imagination.

But the poet, by denominating the Goddess Calypso,
and the island Ogygia, appears to me very evidently to
confirm the preceding exposition. .For Calypso is derived
from xaavrrw, which signifies to cover as with a veil; and
Ogygia is from wyvyios, ancient. And as the imaginative
spirit is the primary vehicle of the rational soul, which
it derived from the planetary spheres, and in which it
descended to the sublunary regions, it may with great
propriety be said to cover the soul as with a fine garment
or veil; and it is no less properly denominated ancient,
when considered as the first vehicle of the soul. °

In this region of the phantasy, then, Ulysses is repre-
sented as an involuntary captive, continually employed in
bewailing his absence from his true country, and ardently
longing to depart from the fascinating embraces of the
Goddess. For thus his situation is beautifully described
by the poet: :

But sad Ulysses, by himself apart,
Pour'd the big sorrows of his swelling heart ;

256 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

All on the lonely shore he sat to weep,

And roll’d his eyes around the restless deep ;
Tow’rd his lov’d coast he roll’d his eyes in vain,
Til dimm’d with rising grief they stream’d again °.

His return, however, is at length effected through Mer-
cury, or reason, who prevails on the Goddess to yield to
his dismission. Hence, after her consent, Ulysses is,
with great propriety, said to have placed himself on the
throne on which Mercury had sate: for reason then
resumes her proper seat when the reasoning power is
about to abandon the delusive and detaining charms of
imagination. But Homer appearg to me to insinuate
something admirable when he represents Ulysses, on his
departure from Calypso, sailing by night, and contem-
plating the order and light of the stars, in the following
beautiful lines :

And now, rejoicing in the prosperous gales,

With beating heart Ulysses spread his sails ;
Plac’d at the helm he sate, and mark’d the skies,
Nor clos'd in sleep his ever watchful eyes.

There viewed the Pleiads, and the northern team,
And great Orion’s more refulgent beam ;

To which around the axle of the sky

The Bear, revolving, points his golden eye;

Who shines exalted on the ethereal plain, .

Nor bathes his blazing forehead in the main ?.

For what he. here says of Ulysses, is perfectly con-
- formable to what is said by Plato in the 7th book of his
Republic, respecting the man who is to be led from the
cave, which he there describes, to the light of day,
i.e. from a sensible to an intellectual life, viz. “ that he
will more easily see what the heavens contain, and the
heavens themselves, by looking in the night to the light of
the stars and the moon, than by day looking on the sun,
and the light of the sun.” For by this, as Proclus well -

° Odyss. lib. v. 82, &c. The translation by Pope.
P Ibid. lib, v. 269, &c.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 207

observes, “ Plato signifies the contemplation of intelli-
gibles, of which the stars and their light are imitations,
so far as all of them partake of the form of the sun, in the
same manner as intelligibles are characterized by the
nature of the good. These, then, such a one must con-
template, that he may understand their essence, and
those summits of their nature, by which they are dei-
form processions from the teffable principle of things.”
Ulysses, therefore, who is hastening to an intellectual
life, contemplates these lucid objects with vigilant eyes,
rejoicing in the illuminations and assistance they afford
him while sailing over the dark ocean of a sensible life.

But az he is now earnestly engaged in departing from
sense, he must unavoidably be pursued by the anger of
Neptune, the lord of generation and a sensible life, whose
service he has forsake, and whose offspring he has -
blinded by stratagem, and irritated by reproach. Hence,
in the midst of these delightful contemplations, he is
almost overwhelmed by the waves of misfortune, roused
by the wrath of his implacable foe. He is, however,
through divine assistance, or Leucothea, enabled to sustain
the dreadful storm. For, receiving from divinity the
mmortal fillet of true fortitude, and binding it under his
breast, (the proper seat of courage,) he encounters the
billows of adversity, and bravely shoots along the
boisterous ocean of life. It must, however, be carefully ~
observed, that the poet is far from ascribing a certain
passion to a divine nature, when he speaks of the anger of
Neptune : for, in thus speaking, he, as well as.other theo-
logists, intended only to signify our inaptitude to the
participation of its beneficent influence.

Ulysses therefore, having with much difficulty escaped
the dangers arising from the wrath of Neptune, lands at
length on the island of Pheacia, where he is hospitably
received, and honourably dismissed. Now, as it is proper
that he who, like Ulysses, departs from the delusions of
imagination, should immediately betake himself to the
more intellectual light of the rational energy of the saul,

5

258 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. |

the land of Pheacia ought to correspond to our intellec-
tual part, and particularly to that portion of it which is
denominated in Greek dianoia, and which is characterized
by the power of reasoning scientifically, deriving the
principles of its discursive energy from intellect. And
that it has this correspondence, the following observations
will, I persuade myself, abundantly evince. In the first
place, then, this island is represented by the poet as
enjoying a perpetual spring, which plainly indicates that
it is not any terrestrial situation. Indeed, the critical
commentators have been so fully convinced of this, that
they acknowledge Homer describes Pheeacia as one of the
Fortunate Islands; but they have not attempted to pene-
trate his design, in such a description. Jf, however, we
consider the perfect liberty, unfading variety, and endless
delight, which our intellectual part affords, we shall find
that it is truly the Fortunate Island of the soul, in which,
by the exercise of the theoretic virtues, it is possible for
@ man, even in the present life, to obtain genuine felicity,
though not in that perfection as when he is liberated from
the body. With respect to the Fortunate Islands, their
occult meaning is thus beautifully unfolded by Olympio-
dorus, in his MS, commentary on the Gorgias of Plato :
Ag δὲ εἰδέναι ort αἱ moot νπερκυπτουσι τὴς baracons ἀνωτερω
ουσαᾶι, THY οὖν πολιτείαν τὴν υπερχυψασαν τοὺ βιου καὶ τὴς γενησεως,
᾿“μακαρὼν νησοὺς καλοῦσι" ταῦτον δὲ ECT! καὶ τὸ ηλυσιον πεδὶον.
δια τοι. τουτὸ καὶ ὁ Ἡρακλης TEAEUT LOY αθλον, εν τοις ἐσπεριοις
μβεβεσιν EXOINTATO, AVTL κατηγωνισᾶτο τὸν THOTEIVOY καὶ χθονιον͵.
βιον, καὶ λοίπον ev nusea, o ἔστιν εν ἀληθεια και φωτι εζη: 1,6. “It
is necessary to know that islands are raised above, being
higher than the sea. A condition of being, therefore,
which transcends this corporeal life and ‘generation, is
denominated the islands of the blessed; but these are
the same with the Elysian fields. And on this account,
Hercules is reported to have accomplished his last labour.
in the Hesperian regions ; signifying by this, that having
vanquished an obscure and terrestrial life, he afterwards
lived in open day, that is, in truth and resplendent light.”

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 209

In the next place, the poet, by his description of the
palace of Alcinous, the king of this island, admirably
indicates the pure and splendid light of the energy of
reason. For he says of it:

The front appear’d with radiant splendours gay,
Bright as the lamp of night, or orb of day.
The walls were massy brass : the cornice high
Blue metals crown’d in colours of the sky.
Rich plates of gold the folding doors incase ;
The pillars silver on a brazen base.

Silver the Jintels deep projecting o’er,

And gold the ringlets that command the door.
Two rows ef stately dogs on either hand,

In sculptur’d gold, and labour’d silver, stand.
These Vulcan form’d intelligent to wait
Immortal guardians at Alcinous’ gate 4.

And he represents it as no less internally luminous by
night.

Refulgent pedestals the walls surround,

Which boys of gold with flaming torches crown’d ;

The polish’d ore, reflecting ev’ry ray,
Blaz’d on the banquets with a double day.

Indeed Homer, by his description of the outside of this
palace, sufficiently indicates its agreement with the planet
Mercury, the deity of which presides over the rational
energy. For this God, in the language of Proclus’,
‘* unfolds into light intellectual gifts, fills all things with
divine reasons {t. 6. forms, and productive principles,]
elevates souls to intellect, wakens them as from a pro-
found sleep, converts them through investigation to them-
selves, and by a certain obstetric art and invention of
pure intellect, brings them to a blessed life.” According
to astronomers, likewise, the planet Mercury is resplen-
dent with the colours of all the other planets. Thus
Baptista Porta in Celest. Physiog. p. 88. ““ Videbis
in eo Saturni luridum, Martis ignem, Jovis candidum,

4“ Odyss. lib. vii.84, &c. The translation by Pope.
τ᾿ In Euclid. Element. lib, i. p. 14.

260 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

_Veneris flavum, necnon utriusque nitor, hilaritasque, et

ob id non peculiaris forme, sed eorum formam capit, cum
- quibus associatur, ob id in describendo ejus colore astro-
logi differunt.” 2. 6. “ You may perceive in this planet
the pale colour of Saturn, the fire of Mars, the whiteness
of Jupiter, and the yellow of Venus; and likewise the
brilliancy and hilarity of each. On this account it is not
of a peculiar form, but receives the form of its associates,
and thus causes astrologers to differ in describing its
colour.”

But that the island of Pheacia is the dominion of
reason, is, I think, indisputably confirmed by Homer’s
account of the ships fabricated by its inhabitants. For
of these, he says:

So shalt thou instant reach the realm assign’d,

In wond’rous ships self-mov’d, instinct with mind.
No helm secures their course, no pilot guides,
Like man intelligent they plough the tides,
Conscious of ev’ry coast and ev’ry bay,

That lies beneath the sun’s all-seeing ray ;

And veil’d in clouds impervious to the eye,
Fearless and rapid through the deep they fly °.

For it is absurd to suppose that Homer would employ
such an hyperbole, in merely describing the excellency of
the Pheacian ships. Hence, as it so greatly surpasses
the bounds of probability, and is so contrary to the
admirable prudence which Homer continually displays, it
can only be admitted as an allegory, pregnant with latent
meaning, and the recondite wisdom of antiquity. The
poet likewise adds respecting the Pheacians :

These did the ruler of the deep ordain

To build proud navies, and command the main ;

On canvas wings to cut the wat’ry way,

No bird more light, no thought more swift than they.

The last of which lines so remarkably agrees with the
preceding explanation, that I presume no stronger confirm-

* Odyss. lib. viii. 556, &c.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 26 1

ation ean be desired. Nor is the original less gatis-
factory: .
τῶν γεῖς ὠχείαι WOES WTEC NE νουμα ©,

ἃ, ε. “ The ships of these men are swift as a wing, or as
@ conception of the mind.” But the inhabitants of the
palace are represented as spending their days in continual
festivity, and unceasing mirth; in listening to the har-
mony of the lyre, or in forming the tuneful mazes of the
joyful dance. For to the man who lives under the guidance
of reason, or to the good man, every day, as Diogenes
said, is a festival. Hence, such a one is constantly em-
ployed in tuning the lyre of recollection, in harmonious
revolutions about an intelligible essence, and the never- —
satiating and deifying banquet of intellect.

And here we may observe how much the behaviour of
Ulysses, at the palace of Alcinous, confirms the preceding
exposition, and accords with his character, as a man
passing in a regular manner from the delusions of sense,
to the realities of intellectual enjoyment. For as he is
now converted to himself, and is seated in the palace of
reason, it is highly proper that he should call to mind his
past conduct, and be afflicted with the-survey ; and that he
should be wakened to sorrow by the lyre of reminiscence,
and weep over the follies of his past active life. Hence,
when the divine bard Demodocus, inspired by the fury of
the Muses, sings the contention between Ulysses and
Achilles, on his golden lyre, Ulysses is vehemently affected
with the relation. And when the inhabitants of the palace,
z. e. the powers and energies of the rational soul, trans-
ported with the song, demanded its repetition,

Again Ulysses veil’d his pensive head,

Again, unwenn’d, a shower of sorrow shed.
For to the man who is making a proficiency in virtue, the
recollection of his former conduct is both pleasing and
painful; pleasing, so far as in some instances it was
attended with rectitude, but painful so far as in others it
was erroneous.

Odyss. lib. vil. 33.

262 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

Ulysses, also, is with the greatest propriety represented
as relating his past adventures in the palace of Alcinous.
For as he now betakes himself to the intellectual light of
the reasoning power, it is highly necessary that he should
review his past conduct, faithfully enumerate the errors of
his life, and anxiously solicit a return to true manners,
and perfect rectitude of mind. As likewise he is now on
his passage, by the pure energy of reason to regain the
‘lost empire of his soul, he is represented as falling into so
profound a sleep in his voyage, as to be insensible for
some time of its happy consummation ; by which the poet
indicates his being separated from sensible concerns, and
wholly converted to the energies of the rational soul.
Nor is 10 without reason that the poet represents Ithaca,
as presenting itself to the mariners’ view, when the bright
morning star emerges from the darkness of might. For
thus he sings :

But when the morning star, with early ray,
Flam’d in the front of heav’n and promis’d day ;
Like distant clouds, the mariner descries

Fair Ithaca’s emerging hills arise *.

Since it is only by the dawning beams of intellect, that
the discursive energy of reason can gain a glimpse of the
native country and proper seat of empire of the soul.

᾿ Ulysses therefore, being now converted to the energies
of the rational soul, and anxious to commence the
cathartic virtues, recognizes, through the assistance of
Minerva, or wisdom, his native land: and immediately
enters into a consultation with the Goddess, how he may
effectually banish the various perturbations and inordinate
desires, which yet lurk in the penetralia of his soul. For
~ this purpose, it is requisite that he should relinquish all
external possessions, mortify every sense, and employ
every stratagem, which may finally destroy these malevo-
lent foes. Hence, the garb of poverty, the wrinkles of
age, and the want of the necessaries of life, are symbols

" Odyss. lib. xiii, 98, &c.

-

ON THE WANDERLNGS OF ULYSSES. 263

of mortified habits, desertion of sensible pursuits, and an
intimate conversion to intellectual good. For the sensi-
tive eye must now give place to the purer sight of the
rational soul; and the strength and energies of the corpo-
real nature aust yield to the superior vigour of intellec-
tual exertion, and the severe exercise of cathartic virtue.
And this, Homer: appears most evidently to indicate in
the following beautiful lines :

Now seated in the olive’s sacred shade,

Confer the hero and the martial maid.

The Goddess of the azure eyes began:

Son of Laertes! much experienc’d man!

The suitor train thy earliest care demand,

Of that luxurious race to rid the land.

Three years thy house their lawless rule has'seen,
And proud addresses to the matchless queen* ;
But she thy absence mourns from day to day,
And inly bleeds, and silent wastes away ;
Elusive of the bridal hour, she gives

Fond hopes to all, and all with hopes deceives ¥.

Hence:

It fits thee now to wear a dark disguise, ἡ

And secret walk unknown to mortal eyes ;

For this my hand shall wither ev’ry grace,

And ev'ry elegance of form and face,

O’er thy smooth skin a bark of wrinkles spread,
Turn hoar the auburn honours of thy head,
Disfigure every limb with coarse attire,

And in thine eyes extinguish all the fire ;

Add all the wants and the decays of life,
Estrange thee from thy own ; thy son, thy wife ;
From the loath’d object ev’ry sight shall turn,
And the blind suitors their destruction scorn 5.

After this follows the discovery of Ulysses to Tele-
machus, which is no less philosophically sublime than

* i. 6. Philosophy ; for of this Penelope is an image.

Υ Odyss. lib. xiii. 373, &c.

2 Odyss. lib. xiii. 397, &c. The translation of the above, and
likewise of all the following passages from the Odyssey, 1s by Pope.

204 ΟΝ THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

poetically beautiful. For, by Telemachus, we must under-
stand @ true scientific conception of things; since this is
the legitimate offspring of the energy of the rational soul,
in conjunction with philosophy. Hence Ulysses, while
employed in the great work of mortification, recognizes
his genuine offspring, and secretly plans with him the
destruction of his insidious foes. And hence we may
see the propriety of Telemachus being represented as
exploring his absent father, and impatient for his return.
For the rational soul then alone associates with a true
conception of things, when it withdraws itself from
sensible delights, and meditates a restoration of its fallen
dignity and original sway.

And now Ulysses presents himself to our view in the
habits cf mortification, hastening to his long deserted
palace, or the occult recesses of his soul, that he may
mark the conduct and plan the destruction of those bane-
ful passions which are secretly attempting to subvert the
empire of his mind. Hence, the poet very properly and
pathetically exclaims:

And now his city strikes the monarch’s eyes,

Alas ! how chang’d ! a man of miseries ;

Propt on a staff, a beggar, old and bare,

In tatter’d garments, flutt’ring with the air®.
\

However; as this disguise was solely assumed for the
purpose of procuring ancient purity and lawful rule, he
divests himself of the torn garments of mortification,
as soon as he begins the destruction of occult desires ;
and resumes the proper dignity and strength of his
genuine form. But it is not without reason that Pene-
lope, who is the image of philosophy, furnishes the
instrument by which the hostile rout of passions are
destroyed. For what besides the arrows of philosophy
can extirpate the leading bands of impurity and vice?
Hence, as soon as he is furnished with this irresistible

* Odyss, lib. xvii. 201, &c. |

ON FHE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 265

’ weapon, he no longer defers the ruin of his insidious
foes, but

Then fierce the hero o’er the threshold strode ;
Stript of his rags, he blaz’d out like a God.
Full in their face the lifted bow he bore,

And quiver’d deaths a formidable store ;
Before his feet the rattling show’r he threw,
And thus terrific to the suitor crew».

But Homer represents Penelope as remaining ignorant
of Ulysses, even after the suitors are destroyed, and he is
seated on the throne of majesty, anxious to be known, and
impatient to return her chaste and affectionate embrace.
For thus he describes her :

Then gliding through the marble valves in state,
Oppos’d before the shining fire she sate.

‘The monarch, by a colomn high enthron’d,

His éye withdrew, and fixed it on the ground,
Anxious to hear his queen the silence break :

Amaz’d she sate, and impotent to speak ;

O’er all the man her eyes she rolls in vain,

Now hopes, now fears, now knows, then doubts again€¢.

By which Homer indicates, that Philosophy, through
her long absence from the soul, and the foreign manners
and habits which the soul had assumed, is a stranger
to it, so that it is difficult for her to recognize the union ~
and legitimate association which once subsisted between
them. However, in order to facilitate this discovery,
Ulysses renders all pure and harmonious within the
recesses of his soul ; and, by the assistance of Minerva, or

wisdom, resumes the garb and dignity which he had for-
merly displayed.

Then mstant to the bath (the monarch cries,)
Bid the gay youth and sprightly virgins rise,

> Odyss. lib. xxii. 1, &c. © Odyss. lib. xxiii. 88, &c.

266 ON THE WANDERINGS OF. ULYSSES.

Thence all descend in pomp and proud array,
And bid the dome resound the mirthful lay ;
While the sweet lyrist airs of raptures sings,
And forms the dance responsive to the strings®¢.

And afterwards, Ulysses is described as appearing,
through the interposition of Minerva, like one of the
emmortals.

So Pallas his heroic form improves,
With bloom divine, and like a God he moves®.

For, indeed, he who, like Ulysses, has completely
destroyed the domination of his passions, and purified
himself, through the cathartic virtues, from their defiling
-nature, no longer ranks in the order of mortals, but
is assimilated to divinity. And now, in order that he
may become entirely known to Philosophy, that chaste
Penelope of the soul, it is only requisite for him to relate
the secrets of their mystic union, and recognize the
bower of intellectual love. - For then perfect recol-
lection will ensue; and the anxiety of diffidence will be
changed into transports of assurance, and tears of rap-
turous delight.

And thus we have attended Ulysses in his various
wanderings and woes, till, through the cathartic virtues,
he recovers the ruined empire of his soul. But, as it
is requisite that he should, in the next place, possess and
energize according to the theoretic or contemplative
virtues, the end of which is a union with deity, as far
as this can be effected by man in the present life, Homer
only indicates to us his attainment of this end, without
giving a detail of the gradual advances by which he
arrived at this consummate felicity. This union is
occultly signified by Ulysses first beholding, and after-

4 Odyss. lib. xxiii. 131, &c.
© Odyss, lib. xxiii. 163, &c.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 267

wards ardently embracing his father with ecatatic delight.
With most admirable propriety, also, is Ulysses repre-
sented as proceeding, in order to effect this union, by
himself alone, to his father who is also alone.

Alone and unattended, let me try
If yet I share the old man’s memory‘,

says Ulysses. And afterwards it is said,

Bat all alone the hoary king he found 5,

For a union with the ineffable one of the , Demiurgus, the
true father of the soul, can only be accomplished by the
soul recurring to its own unity; and having for this
purpose previously dismissed and abandoned every thing
foreign to it. This occurrence, indeed, of the soul with
deity, is, as Plotinus divinely says, φυγὴ μόνου προς uovov4,
a flight of the alone to the alone, in which most beautiful
expression I have no doubt he alludes to this mystic
termination of the wanderings of Ulysses, in the embraces
of his father. Proclus also, in a no less admirable
manner, alludes to this union in his Commentaries on ©
the Timeus of Plato’. The allusion is in his comment
on the ‘words, “ It is difficult, therefore, to discover the
maker and father of this universe ; and, when found, it is
impossible to speak of him to all men.” On this passage
Proclus observes: ‘‘ It is necessary that the soul, be-
coming an intellectual world, and being as much as
possible assimilated to the whole intelligible world,
should introduce herself to the maker of the universe ;
and from this introduction, should, in a certain respect,
become familiar with him through a continued intel-

f Odyss. lib. xxiv. 215, &c. 8 Ibid. lib. xxiv. 225.
h These are the concluding words of the last book of his last Ennead.
‘1 See vol. i. p..254, of my translation of that work.

268 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

lectual energy. For uninterrupted energy about any thing
calls forth and resuscitates our dormant ideas. But
through this familiarity, becoming stationed at the doar
of the father, it is necessary that we should be united to
him. For discovery is this, to meet with him, to be
united to him, fo associate alone with the alone, and to see
him himself, the soul hastily withdrawing herself from
every’ other energy to him. For, being present with her
father, she then considers scientific discussions to be but
words*, banquets together with him on the truth of real
being, and in pure splendour 1s purely initiated in entire
and stable visions. Such, therefore, is the discovery of
the father, not that which is doxastic [or pertaining to
opinion]; for this is dubious, and not very remote from
the irrational life. Neither is it scientific; for this is
syllogistic and composite, and does not come into contact
with the intellectual essence of the intellectual Demi-
urgus. But it is that which subsists according to intel- -
lectual vision itself, a contact with the intelligible, and
a union with the demiurgic intellect. For this may
properly be denominated difficult, either as hard to
obtain, presenting itself to souls after every evolution
of life, or as the true labour of souls. For, after the —
wandering about generation, after purification, and the
light of science, intellectual energy and the intellect
which is in us shine forth, placing the soul in the father
as in a port, purely establishing her in demiurgic intel-
lections, and conjoining light with light; not such as.
that of science, but more beautiful, more intellectual,
.and partaking more of the nature of the one than this.
For this is the paternal port, and the discovery of the father,
viz. an undefiled union with him.”

With great beauty also, and in perfect conformity to
the most recondite theology, is the father .of Ulysses

k This is in consequence of a union with the Demiurgus being so
much superior to scientific perception.

ΟΝ THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 209

represented as coarsely clothed, and occupied in bota-
nical labours : :

But all alone the hoary king he found;

His habit coarse, but warmly wrapt around ;

His head, that bow’d with many a pensive care,

Fenc’d with a double cap of goatskin hair ;

His buskins old, in former service torn,

But well repair’d; and gloves against the thorn.

In this array the kingly gard’ner stood, |

And clear’d a plant, encumber’d with its wood!,

For this simplicity, and coarseness of the garb of Laertes,
considered as an image of the true father of Ulysses,
is, in every respect, conformable to the method adopted
by ancient mythologists in their adumbrations of deity.
For they imitated the transcendency of divine natures
by things preternatural; a power more divine than all
reason by things irrational; and, by apparent deformity, a
beauty which surpasses every thing corporeal, This
array, therefore, of the father of Ulysses, is, in the lan-—
guage of Proclus, indicative “ of an essence established
in the simplicity of the one, and vehemently rejoicing, as
some one of the piously wise says, in an unadorned
privation of form, and extending it to those who are able
to survey it™,” And the botanical labours of Laertes are
an image of the providential attention of the Demiurgus
to the immediate ramifications and blossoms of his own
divine essence, in which they are meffably. rooted, and
from which they eternally germinate.

Though Ulysses, however, is placed through the
theoretic virtues in the paternal port, as far as this is
possible to be effected in the present life, yet we must
remember, according to the beautiful observation of Por-

' Odyss. lib. xxiv. 225, &c.

™ Ta μὲν γαρ sols Sta καὶ ev τὴ AWAOTNTS τοῦ ἔγος ἐιδρυμῖνα τὴν ἀκαλλοπιστον
ευμορφιαν" (lege ἀμορφιαν) ὡς φησι τις τῶν τὰ ὁσία σόφων, διαφεροντως ἀγαπῶντα,
καὶ προτεινοντα τοῖς εἰς αὐτὰ βλέπειν δυγαμνοις. ---- Ῥτοοὶ. in Parmenid. lib. i.,
Ρ. 38. 8vo. Parisiis, 1821.

2970 ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES.

phyry, that he is not freed from molestation, till he has
passed over the raging sea of a material nature; 7. e. has
become impassive® to the excitations of the irrational
life, and is entirely abstracted from external concerns.
For, |

Then heav’n decrees in peace to end his days,

And steal himself from life by slow decays ;
Unknown to pain, in age resign his breath,

When late stern Neptune points the shaft of death ;
To the dark grave retiring as to rest;

His people blessing, by his people blest 5.

I shall only observe farther, that Plotinus also con-
sidered the wanderings of Ulysses as a fabulous nar-
ration containing a latent meaning, such as that which
we have above unfolded. This is evident from the fol-
lowing extract from his admirable treatise on the Beauti-
ful: “It is here, then, [in order to survey the beautiful
itself] that we may more truly exclaim,

Haste, let us fly and all our sails expand,
To gain our dear, our long-lost native land P.

But by what leading stars shall we direct our flight,
and by what means avoid the magic power of Circe,
and the detaining charms of Calypso? For thus the
fable of Ulysses obscurely signifies, which feigns him
abiding an unwilling exile, though pleasant spectacles

" This impassivity, or perfect subjugation of the passions to reason,
which is the true apathy of the Stoics and Platonists, is indicated by
Ulysses finding a nation

s¢ Who ne’er knew salt or heard the billows roar.”

° Odyss. lib. xxiii. 281, &c. By the people, in these lines, the
inferior parts or powers of the soul are indicated.
P liad, lib. ii. 140, and lib. ix. 27.

ON THE WANDERINGS OF ULYSSES. 271

were continually presented to his sight; and every thing
was proffered to invite his stay, which can delight the
senses and captivate the heart. But our true country,
like that of Ulysses, is from whence we came, and where
our father lives 4.”

4 See my paraphrased translation of this treatise, p. 37, &c.

THE END.

LONDON:
PRINTED BY J. MOYES, GREVILLE STREET.

A,
UNIV. OF MICHIGAN